Value of active warming devices for intraoperative hypothermia prevention—a meta‐analysis and cost‐benefit analysis

Purpose: Historically, studies suggested that intraoperative hypothermia (IH) could result in significant resource consumption, but more recent studies have found the opposite. The purpose of this study is to estimate the value of active warming devices for IH prevention based on synthesized evidence. Methods: A cost‐benefit analysis was conducted using the effect of active warming versus passive warming devices for intraoperative hypothermia from a meta‐analysis. The item-based aggregated treatment cost approach was adopted to estimate the cost of each adverse event, which was then weighted to calculate the total cost of IH. Results: IH was associated with higher risks of bleeding, surgical site infection, and shivering compared with normothermia. The cost of one case of IH was $363.80, and the use of active warming devices might save $152.80. Extra investment in active warming (e.g., $291.00) might only be cost‐beneficial when the minimum willingness-to‐pay is $150.00. Conclusions: Synthesized evidence showed that the cost of IH might be overestimated. Furthermore, the value of using active warming devices remains uncertain because the willingness to pay may vary between decision‐makers. As not enough awareness of hypothermia prevention in some countries, further research into the clinical use of active warming devices during major surgeries is warranted.