Table 23:
Budget Impact Analysis Results - Scenario Analyses
Scenario | Budget impact, $a | %changec | Total number of surgically treated patients in new scenario | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Totalb | |||
Reference case | 251,601 | 311,243 | 371,552 | 432,529 | 494,174 | 1,861,100 | - | 110 |
Scenario 1, population of interest | 745,359 | 772,804 | 781,482 | 809,150 | 837,041 | 3,945,836 | 112% | 217 |
Scenario 2, increased expansion of MRgFUS neurosurgery | 251,601 | 350,710 | 432,685 | 536,026 | 622,232 | 2,193,253 | 18% | 126 |
Scenario 3, steady but slower expansion of MRgFUS neurosurgery | 251,601 | 252,042 | 250,254 | 246,236 | 239,990 | 1,240,123 | -33% | 80 |
Scenario 4, steady but increased expansion of MRgFUS neurosurgery | 488,405 | 500,432 | 510,231 | 517,800 | 523,140 | 2,540,008 | 36% | 140 |
Scenario 5, decreased Gamma Knife radiosurgery | 262,086 | 321,728 | 382,037 | 443,014 | 504,659 | 1,913,524 | 3% | 110 |
Scenario 6, patients not eligible for MRgFUS neurosurgery receive RFA | 255,472 | 315,114 | 375,423 | 436,401 | 498,045 | 1,880,455 | 1% | 110 |
Scenario 7, public funding includes capital costs (average patient volume) | 420,664 | 514,119 | 608,242 | 703,031 | 798,489 | 3,044,546 | 64% | 110 |
Scenario 8, public funding includes capital costs (low patient volume) | 437,571 | 534,407 | 631,911 | 730,082 | 828,920 | 3,162,890 | 70% | 110 |
Scenario 9, public funding includes capital costs (high patient volume) | 394,655 | 482,908 | 571,828 | 661,416 | 751,671 | 2,862,477 | 54% | 110 |
Scenario 10, medication costs decrease by 25% | 248,629 | 304,741 | 360,964 | 417,298 | 473,741 | 1,805,373 | -3% | 110 |
Scenario 11, 10% of patients treated with MRgFUS neurosurgery require re-treatment with Gamma Knife radiosurgery | 262,226 | 311,243 | 371,552 | 432,529 | 494,174 | 1,871,725 | 1% | 110 |
Scenario 12, 10% of patients treated with MRgFUS neurosurgery require re-treatment with RFA | 269,400 | 311,243 | 371,552 | 432,529 | 494,174 | 1,878,899 | 1% | 110 |
Scenario 13, decreased inpatient procedure cost of MRgFUS neurosurgery | 217,881 | 270,779 | 324,344 | 378,577 | 433,478 | 1,625,058 | -13% | 110 |
Scenario 14, increased inpatient procedure cost of MRgFUS neurosurgery | 285,321 | 351,707 | 418,761 | 486,482 | 554,870 | 2,097,141 | 13% | 110 |
Scenario 15, decreased inpatient procedure cost of RFA | 257,765 | 317,407 | 377,716 | 438,693 | 500,338 | 1,891,919 | 2% | 110 |
Scenario 16, increased inpatient procedure cost of RFA | 245,437 | 305,079 | 365,389 | 426,366 | 488,010 | 1,830,280 | -2% | 110 |
Scenario 17, decreased inpatient procedure cost of Gamma Knife radiosurgery | 255,179 | 314,821 | 375,131 | 436,108 | 497,752 | 1,878,991 | 1% | 110 |
Scenario 18, increased inpatient procedure cost of Gamma Knife radiosurgery | 251,438 | 311,080 | 371,390 | 432,367 | 494,011 | 1,860,286 | 0%d | 110 |
Scenario 19, lower estimate of RFA adverse event costs | 252,178 | 311,820 | 372,129 | 433,106 | 494,751 | 1,863,984 | 0%d | 110 |
Scenario 20, upper estimate of RFA adverse event costs | 251,468 | 311,110 | 371,420 | 432,397 | 494,041 | 1,860,436 | 0%d | 110 |
Scenario 21, lower estimate of Gamma Knife radiosurgery adverse event costs | 252,740 | 312,382 | 372,691 | 433,669 | 495,313 | 1,866,795 | 0%d | 110 |
Scenario 22, no anesthesiologist costs for MRgFUS neurosurgery | 243,004 | 300,926 | 359,517 | 418,774 | 478,700 | 1,800,921 | -3% | 110 |
Scenario 23, alternate fee code for Gamma Knife radiosurgery | 249,075 | 308,771 | 369,026 | 430,004 | 491,648 | 1,848,470 | -1% | 110 |
Scenario 24, public funding of DBS and replacement of DBS by MRgFUS neurosurgery | 168,730 | 214,068 | 257,845 | 300,061 | 340,715 | 1,281,419 | -31% | 120 |
Scenario 25, increase in physician fees | 253,638 | 313,879 | 374,814 | 436,444 | 498,768 | 1,877,543 | 1% | 110 |
Abbreviations: DBS, deep brain stimulation; MRgFUS, magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound; RFA, radiofrequency ablation.
All costs are reported in 2023 Canadian dollars.
Results may appear inexact due to rounding.
Percent change calculated as the difference in the total budget impact of the scenario analysis and the total budget impact of the reference case divided by the total budget impact of the reference case.
Percent change was very small (<0.5%).