Literature DB >> 25604096

Pharmacological management of chronic lower back pain: a review of cost effectiveness.

Marion Haas1, Richard De Abreu Lourenco.   

Abstract

Lower back pain is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions in the developed world and accounts for significant health services use. The American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society have published a joint clinical guideline that recommends providing patients with information on prognosis and self-management, the use of medications with proven benefits and, for those who do not improve, consideration be given to the use of spinal manipulation (for acute lower back pain only), interdisciplinary rehabilitation, exercise, acupuncture, massage, yoga, cognitive behavioural therapy or relaxation. The purpose of this review was to evaluate published economic evaluations of pharmacological management for chronic lower back pain. A total of seven studies were eligible for inclusion in there view. The quality of the economic evaluations undertaken in the included studies was not high. This was primarily because of the nature of the underlying clinical evidence, most of which did not come from rigorous randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the manner in which it was incorporated into the economic evaluations. All studies provided reasonable information about what aspects of healthcare and other resource use were identified, measured and valued. However, the reporting of total costs was not uniform across studies. Measures of pain and disability were the most commonly collected outcomes measures. Two studies collected information on quality of life directly from participants while two studies modelled this information based on the literature. Future economic evaluations of interventions for chronic lower back pain, including pharmacological interventions, should be based on the results of well-conducted RCTs where the measurement of costs and outcomes such as quality of life and quality-adjusted life-years is included in the trial protocol, and which have a follow-up period sufficient to capture meaningful changes in both costs and outcomes. In the absence of RCT data, economic models should be used to estimate future costs and outcomes using robust methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25604096     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-015-0258-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  19 in total

Review 1.  Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain.

Authors:  G B Andersson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-08-14       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  The burden of chronic low back pain: clinical comorbidities, treatment patterns, and health care costs in usual care settings.

Authors:  Mugdha Gore; Alesia Sadosky; Brett R Stacey; Kei-Sing Tai; Douglas Leslie
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 3.  Examining the value and quality of health economic analyses: implications of utilizing the QHES.

Authors:  Joshua J Ofman; Sean D Sullivan; Peter J Neumann; Chiun-Fang Chiou; James M Henning; Sally W Wade; Joel W Hay
Journal:  J Manag Care Pharm       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb

Review 4.  An updated overview of clinical guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain in primary care.

Authors:  Bart W Koes; Maurits van Tulder; Chung-Wei Christine Lin; Luciana G Macedo; James McAuley; Chris Maher
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-07-03       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Caudal epidural injections with sarapin or steroids in chronic low back pain.

Authors:  L Manchikanti; V Pampati; J J Rivera; C Beyer; K S Damron; R C Barnhill
Journal:  Pain Physician       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.965

6.  A cost-consequence analysis of pregabalin versus usual care in the symptomatic treatment of refractory low back pain: sub-analysis of observational trial data from orthopaedic surgery and rehabilitation clinics.

Authors:  Carles Morera-Domínguez; Félix Ceberio-Balda; Mariano Flórez-García; Xavier Masramón; Vanessa López-Gómez
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.859

7.  Cost-effectiveness of duloxetine in chronic low back pain: a Quebec societal perspective.

Authors:  Ronald Wielage; Megha Bansal; Kinsley Wilson; Robert Klein; Michael Happich
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  The epidemiology, economic burden, and pharmacological treatment of chronic low back pain in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK: a literature-based review.

Authors:  Melissa Juniper; Trong Kim Le; Deirdre Mladsi
Journal:  Expert Opin Pharmacother       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.889

9.  Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.

Authors:  Roger Chou; Amir Qaseem; Vincenza Snow; Donald Casey; J Thomas Cross; Paul Shekelle; Douglas K Owens
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 10.  Can cost utility evaluations inform decision making about interventions for low back pain?

Authors:  Simon Dagenais; Darren M Roffey; Eugene K Wai; Scott Haldeman; Jaime Caro
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2009-09-12       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review of guideline-recommended medications prescribed for treatment of low back pain.

Authors:  Morgan R Price; Zachary A Cupler; Cheryl Hawk; Edward M Bednarz; Sheryl A Walters; Clinton J Daniels
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2022-05-13

2.  The health insurance industry: perpetuating the opioid crisis through policies of cost-containment and profitability.

Authors:  Michael E Schatman; Lynn R Webster
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 3.133

3.  Effectiveness, costs and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care and physiotherapy compared with information and advice in the treatment of non-specific chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Filip Gedin; Martin Skeppholm; Kristina Burström; Vibeke Sparring; Mesfin Tessma; Niklas Zethraeus
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 2.279

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.