“
“Background: Various software packages are commonly used for the implementation and calculation of decision-analytic

models for health economic evaluations. However, comparison of these programs with regard to ease of implementing a model is lacking.

Objectives: (i) to compare the assets and drawbacks of three commonly used software packages for Markov models with regard to ease of implementation; and (ii) to investigate how a technical model validation can GDC-0994 price be conducted by comparing the results of the three implementations.

Methods: A Markov model on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was implemented in TreeAge, Microsoft(R) Excel and Arena(R) with the same assumptions on model structure, transition probabilities and costs. A hypothetical smoking cessation programme for patients in stage I was evaluated

against usual care. The packages were compared with respect to time and effort for implementation, run-time, features for the presentation of results, and flexibility. Agreement between the packages on average costs and life-years gained and on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was considered for technical validation in the form of expected values (between TreeAge and Excel only) and Monte Carlo simulations.

Results: Ease of implementation was best in TreeAge, whereas Arena(R) offered the highest flexibility. Deterministic results were in agreement between TreeAge and Excel, as were simulated values between all three packages.

Conclusions: ARS-1620 purchase Excel offers an intuitive spreadsheet interface, Ferrostatin-1 but the acquisition of and the training in TreeAge or Arena(R)

is worthwhile for more complex models. Double implementation is a practicable validation technique that should be conducted to ensure correct model implementation.”
“Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship of echocardiographic epicardial fat thickness (EFT) with carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods and Results. A total of 139 patients with T2DM (mean age 54.3 perpendicular to 9.2 and 49.6% male) and 40 age and sex-matched control subjects were evaluated. Echocardiographic EFT and ultrasonographic CIMT were measured in all subjects. Patients with T2DM had significantly increased EFT and CIMT than those of the controls (6.0 perpendicular to 1.5 mm versus 4.42 perpendicular to 1.0 mm, P < 0.001 and 0.76 perpendicular to 0.17 mm versus 0.57 perpendicular to 0.14 mm, P < 0.001, resp.). EFT was correlated with CIMT, waist circumference, BMI, age, duration of T2DM, HbA1c in the type 2 diabetic patients. Linear regression analysis showed that CIMT (beta = 3.52, t = 3.72, P < 0.001) and waist circumference (beta = 0.36, t = 2.26, P = 0.03) were found to be independent predictors of EFT. A cutoff high risk EFT value of 6.3 mm showed a sensitivity and specificity of 72.5% and 71.