K.5.2Economic Studies excluded

Author/titleNotes
Cardozo L, Thorpe A, Warner J, and Sidhu M. The cost-effectiveness of solifenacin vs fesoterodine, oxybutynin immediate-release, propiverine, tolterodine extended-release and tolterodine immediate-release in the treatment of patients with overactive bladder in the UK National Health Service. British Journal of Urology International, 2010.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK perspective
Pradelli L and Iannazzo S. Solifenacin in the treatment of overactive bladder syndrome in Italian patients: pharmacoeconomic evaluation. Journal of Medical Economics, 2009.Non-neurogenic population of patients; Italian perspective
Milsom I, Axelsen S, Kulseng-Hansen S, Mattiasson A, Nilsson C G, and Wickstrom J. Cost-effectiveness analysis of solifenacin flexible dosing in patients with overactive bladder symptoms in four Nordic countries. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 2009.Non-neurogenic population of patients; perspective of four Nordic countries
Hakkaart L, Verboom P, Phillips R, and Al M J. The cost utility of solifenacin in the treatment of overactive bladder. International Urology & Nephrology, 2009.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK perspective
Speakman M, Khullar V, Mundy A, Odeyemi I, and Bolodeoku J. A cost-utility analysis of once daily solifenacin compared to tolterodine in the treatment of overactive bladder syndrome. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 2008.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK perspective
Ko Y, Malone D C, and Armstrong E P. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antimuscarinic agents for the treatment of overactive bladder. Pharmacotherapy, 2006.Non-neurogenic population of patients; US perspective
Hughes D A and Dubois D. Cost-effectiveness analysis of extended-release formulations of oxybutynin and tolterodine for the management of urge incontinence. Pharmacoeconomics, 2004.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK perspective
Jumadilova Z, Varadharajan S, Girase P, and Ollendorf D A. Retrospective evaluation of outcomes in patients with overactive bladder receiving tolterodine versus Oxybutynin. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 2006.Non-neurogenic population of patients (95% of patients); US perspective
Getsios D, Caro J J, Ishak K J, El-Hadi W, Payne K, O’Connel M, Albrecht D, Feng D, and Dubois D. Oxybutynin extended release and tolterodine immediate release: a health economic comparison. Clinical Drug Investigation, 2004.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK perspective
Getsios D, Caro J J, Ishak K J, Hadi El W, and Payne K. Canadian economic comparison of extended-release oxybutynin and immediate-release tolterodine in the treatment of overactive bladder. Clinical Therapeutics, 2004.Non-neurogenic population of patients; Canadian perspective
Guest J F, Abegunde D, and Ruiz F J. Cost effectiveness of controlled-release oxybutynin compared with immediate-release oxybutynin and tolterodine in the treatment of overactive bladder in the UK, France and Austria. Clinical Drug Investigation, 2004.Non-neurogenic population of patients; UK, French, and Austrian perspectives
Kobelt G, Jonsson L, and Mattiasson A. Cost-effectiveness of new treatments for overactive bladder: the example of tolterodine, a new muscarinic agent. A Markov model. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 1998.Non-neurogenic population of patients; Swedish perspective

From: Appendix K, Excluded studies

Cover of Urinary Incontinence in Neurological Disease
Urinary Incontinence in Neurological Disease: Management of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction in Neurological Disease.
NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 148.
National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK).
Copyright © 2012, National Clinical Guideline Centre.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher or, in the case of reprographic reproduction, in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the terms stated here should be sent to the publisher at the UK address printed on this page.

The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant laws and regulations and therefore for general use.

The rights of National Clinical Guideline Centre to be identified as Author of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.