Adenoid plays an essential role in local and systemic immunity as well as the development of immune system in children [
1]. Adenoid hypertrophy (AH) is common in children from 4 to 10 years old [
2]. AH without any complications barely needs management. However, AH could result in symptoms like obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), rhinosinusitis, otitis media with effusion (OME) and recurrent upper respiratory tract infection [
3], which could significantly affect the quality of life of children and lead to the need for medical interventions. For these patients, two treatment options are clinically considered. The first option is adenoid-based surgery, including the adenoid surgery, adenotonsillar surgery with or without otitis media surgery [
2,
4]. Surgery could provide long-lasting improvement for quality of life, but is relatively invasive and expensive. Therefore, surgery is not routinely performed for each patient with various symptoms. To date, no consensus on the indications of the adenoid-based surgery has been established [
4]. The second option is drug therapy, which is often cheaper than surgery but may be associated with a comparatively higher rate of symptomatic relapse [
3,
5‐
7]. While the cost and efficacy are both quite different between the two strategies, the cost-effectiveness (CE) between the surgery and the drug therapy needs to be evaluated. While several studies evaluating the effectiveness of adenoid-based surgery and drug therapy for the management of symptomatic AH have been published [
8,
9], the evaluation period in these studies is short [may choose to provide a range]. Furthermore, the cost and effectiveness of adenoid-based surgery and drug therapy should be jointly considered to inform decisions around the proper management of symptomatic AH [
10]. To date, no cost-effectiveness study comparing adenoid-based surgery versus drug therapy over a longer-term period has been published. The aim of this study is therefore to assess the cost-effectiveness of adenoid-based surgery versus drug therapy for the management of symptomatic AH in 4-year-olds over a 6-year period. Yet cost and effectiveness vary among different areas. Here in this article, we choose the USA, a western developed country, and China, an eastern developing country to compare the cost-effectiveness between different treatments as well as between different areas.
The Markov models have advantages in this situation. Generally, the Markov model is applied in describing stochastic process, which is a random process that evolves over time [
11]. By dividing the natural pathway of a disease, assigning transitions probabilities for movements between different pathways, and estimating the total costs and health benefits after the evolution of the disease, the CE of the intervention can be analyzed [
11]. The Markov model has already been widely adopted in the evaluation of disease screening or treatments around the world [
12‐
14]. The advantage of Markov model by taking both costs and outcomes over a period of time into accounts makes it particularly suited to modeling the progression of chronic disease. Especially, the cost, benefits and transitions probabilities could be set as a range in the analysis. Therefore, all circumstances within these ranges could be simulated during analysis so that costs and efficacies of different symptoms could be analyzed in one model.
Based on the Markov model, we analyzed the outcome of the disease and the CE of the different treatments, aimed to provide some evidences for the treatment for symptomatic AH patients.