Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T06:59:05.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: A Preliminary Analysis of its Likely Economic Impact in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Paul F. Gross  and
Greg Goldstein
Paul F. Gross
Affiliation:
Institute of Health Economics and Technology Assessment North Sydney, Australia
Greg Goldstein
Affiliation:
Commonwealth Institute of Health, University of Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Emerging Technology
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 1985 , pp. 200 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.AUA Ad Hoc Committee (1984), Summary and Recommendations of the Meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee to Study the Safety and Clinical Effectiveness of the Current Technology of (I) Percutaneous Lithotripsy, and (2) Non-Invasive Lithotripsy. Paper to be presented to the American Urological Association as a Preliminary Report, New Orleans, Louisiana (May 9) mime.Google Scholar
2.Drummond, M. F.Principles of economic appraisal in health care. Oxford: Oxford University Pressn, 1980.Google Scholar
3.Hodgson, T. A., & Meiners, M.R.Cost-of-illness methodology: A guide to current practices and procedures. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 1982, 60, 429–462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Jonsson, B.Cost-benefit analysis in public health and medical care. Lund Economic Studies, 1976.Google Scholar
5.Johnson, C. M., Wilson, D. M., O'Fallon, W. M. et al. , Renal stone epidemiology. A 25-year study on Rochester, Minnesota. Kidney International, 1979, 16, 624–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. OTA. The Implications of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Medical Technology. Washington D.C. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (August), 219 pp.Google Scholar
7.Russell, J. M., Harrison, L. H., Boyce, W. H.Recurrent urolithiasis following anatrophic nephrolithotomy. Journal of Urology, 1981, 124:471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Schafer, T. Cost and Benefit of the Non-Contact Kidney Stone Disintegration. An unpublished report for Dornier System GMBH, Friedrichshafen, October.Google Scholar
9.Shepard, D. S., & Thompson, M. S. First Principles of Cost-Effectiveness in Health, Public Health Reports 94 (November-December), 1979, 535–43.Google Scholar
10.Witherow, R. O., & Wickham, J. E. A.Nephrolithotomy in chronic renal failure: Saved from dialysis. British Journal of Urology, 1980, 52, 419–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed