Literature DB >> 22215271

Cost-effectiveness of long-term outpatient buprenorphine-naloxone treatment for opioid dependence in primary care.

Bruce R Schackman1, Jared A Leff, Daniel Polsky, Brent A Moore, David A Fiellin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians with appropriate training may prescribe buprenorphine-naloxone (bup/nx) to treat opioid dependence in US office-based settings, where many patients prefer to be treated. Bup/nx is off patent but not available as a generic.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of long-term office-based bup/nx treatment for clinically stable opioid-dependent patients compared to no treatment. DESIGN, SUBJECTS, AND INTERVENTION: A decision analytic model simulated a hypothetical cohort of clinically stable opioid-dependent individuals who have already completed 6 months of office-based bup/nx treatment. Data were from a published cohort study that collected treatment retention, opioid use, and costs for this population, and published quality-of-life weights. Uncertainties in estimated monthly costs and quality-of-life weights were evaluated in probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and the economic value of additional research to reduce these uncertainties was also evaluated. MAIN MEASURES: Bup/nx, provider, and patient costs in 2010 US dollars, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios ($/QALY); costs and QALYs are discounted at 3% annually. KEY
RESULTS: In the base case, office-based bup/nx for clinically stable patients has a CE ratio of $35,100/QALY compared to no treatment after 24 months, with 64% probability of being < $100,000/QALY in probabilistic sensitivity analysis. With a 50% bup/nx price reduction the CE ratio is $23,000/QALY with 69% probability of being < $100,000/QALY. Alternative quality-of-life weights result in CE ratios of $138,000/QALY and $90,600/QALY. The value of research to reduce quality-of-life uncertainties for 24-month results is $6,400 per person eligible for treatment at the current bup/nx price and $5,100 per person with a 50% bup/nx price reduction.
CONCLUSIONS: Office-based bup/nx for clinically stable patients may be a cost-effective alternative to no treatment at a threshold of $100,000/QALY depending on assumptions about quality-of-life weights. Additional research about quality-of-life benefits and broader health system and societal cost savings of bup/nx therapy is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22215271      PMCID: PMC3358393          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1962-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  34 in total

Review 1.  EuroQol: the current state of play.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model.

Authors:  James W Shaw; Jeffrey A Johnson; Stephen Joel Coons
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  What does the value of modern medicine say about the $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year decision rule?

Authors:  R Scott Braithwaite; David O Meltzer; Joseph T King; Douglas Leslie; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Cost-effectiveness of extended buprenorphine-naloxone treatment for opioid-dependent youth: data from a randomized trial.

Authors:  Daniel Polsky; Henry A Glick; Jianing Yang; Geetha A Subramaniam; Sabrina A Poole; George E Woody
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2010-07-12       Impact factor: 6.526

5.  The quality of eight health status measures were compared for chronic opioid dependence.

Authors:  Bohdan Nosyk; Huiyung Sun; Daphne P Guh; Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes; David C Marsh; Suzanne Brissette; Martin T Schechter; Aslam H Anis
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-17       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 6.  Methadone and buprenorphine for the management of opioid dependence: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  M Connock; A Juarez-Garcia; S Jowett; E Frew; Z Liu; R J Taylor; A Fry-Smith; E Day; N Lintzeris; T Roberts; A Burls; R S Taylor
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.014

7.  The National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS): 4-5 year follow-up results.

Authors:  Michael Gossop; John Marsden; Duncan Stewart; Tara Kidd
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 6.526

8.  Buprenorphine versus methadone maintenance therapy: a randomized double-blind trial with 405 opioid-dependent patients.

Authors:  Richard P Mattick; Robert Ali; Jason M White; Susannah O'Brien; Seija Wolk; Cath Danz
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.526

9.  Buprenorphine maintenance treatment in a primary care setting: outcomes at 1 year.

Authors:  Janet M Soeffing; L David Martin; Michael I Fingerhood; Donald R Jasinski; Darius A Rastegar
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2009-06-23

10.  Primary care office-based buprenorphine treatment: comparison of heroin and prescription opioid dependent patients.

Authors:  Brent A Moore; David A Fiellin; Declan T Barry; Lynn E Sullivan; Marek C Chawarski; Patrick G O'Connor; Richard S Schottenfeld
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  40 in total

1.  Tapering off and returning to buprenorphine maintenance in a primary care Office Based Addiction Treatment (OBAT) program.

Authors:  Zoe M Weinstein; Gabriela Gryczynski; Debbie M Cheng; Emily Quinn; David Hui; Hyunjoong W Kim; Colleen Labelle; Jeffrey H Samet
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 4.492

2.  ACMT Position Statement: Remove the Waiver Requirement for Prescribing Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder.

Authors:  Ryan Marino; Jeanmarie Perrone; Lewis S Nelson; Timothy J Wiegand; Evan S Schwarz; Paul M Wax; Andrew I Stolbach
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2019-08-14

3.  The Washington State Hub and Spoke Model to increase access to medication treatment for opioid use disorders.

Authors:  Sharon Reif; Mary F Brolin; Maureen T Stewart; Thomas J Fuchs; Elizabeth Speaker; Shayna B Mazel
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2019-07-19

4.  Short term health-related quality of life improvement during opioid agonist treatment.

Authors:  B Nosyk; J W Bray; E Wittenberg; B Aden; A A Eggman; R D Weiss; J Potter; A Ang; Y-I Hser; W Ling; B R Schackman
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2015-10-25       Impact factor: 4.492

5.  Financing Buprenorphine Treatment in Primary Care: A Microsimulation Model.

Authors:  Jonathan E Fried; Sanjay Basu; Russell S Phillips; Bruce E Landon
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 5.166

Review 6.  Buprenorphine-naloxone therapy in pain management.

Authors:  Kelly Yan Chen; Lucy Chen; Jianren Mao
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  Collaborative Care for Opioid and Alcohol Use Disorders in Primary Care: The SUMMIT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Katherine E Watkins; Allison J Ober; Karen Lamp; Mimi Lind; Claude Setodji; Karen Chan Osilla; Sarah B Hunter; Colleen M McCullough; Kirsten Becker; Praise O Iyiewuare; Allison Diamant; Keith Heinzerling; Harold Alan Pincus
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  The Value of Shorter Initial Opioid Prescriptions: A Simulation Evaluation.

Authors:  Margrét V Bjarnadóttir; David R Anderson; Kislaya Prasad; Ritu Agarwal; D Alan Nelson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Can we build an efficient response to the prescription drug abuse epidemic? Assessing the cost effectiveness of universal prevention in the PROSPER trial.

Authors:  D Max Crowley; Damon E Jones; Donna L Coffman; Mark T Greenberg
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-02-09       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 10.  The estimation of utility weights in cost-utility analysis for mental disorders: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michael Sonntag; Hans-Helmut König; Alexander Konnopka
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.