Literature DB >> 27965045

A Trial-Based Economic Evaluation Comparing Spinal Cord Stimulation With Best Medical Treatment in Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.

Rachel Slangen1, Catharina G Faber2, Nicolaas C Schaper3, Elbert A Joosten4, Robert T van Dongen5, Alfons G Kessels6, Maarten van Kleef4, Carmen D Dirksen7.   

Abstract

The objective was to perform an economic evaluation comparing spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in combination with best medical treatment (BMT) with BMT in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy patients. Alongside a prospective 2-center randomized controlled trial, involving 36 painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy patients with severe lower limb pain not responding to conventional therapy, an economic evaluation was performed. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were based on: 1) societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and 2) direct health care costs and the number of successfully treated patients, respectively, both with a time horizon of 12 months. Bootstrap and secondary analyses were performed to address uncertainty. Total societal cost amounted to €26,539.18 versus €5,313.45 per patient in the SCS and BMT group, respectively. QALYs were .58 versus .36 and the number of successfully treated patients was 55% versus 7% for the SCS and BMT group, respectively. This resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €94,159.56 per QALY and €34,518.85 per successfully treated patient, respectively. Bootstrap analyses showed that the probability of SCS being cost-effective ranges from 0 to 46% with willingness to pay threshold values ranging between €20,000 and €80,000 for a QALY. Secondary analyses showed that cost-effectiveness of SCS became more favorable after correcting for baseline cost imbalance between the 2 groups, extending the depreciation period of SCS material to 4 years, and extrapolation of the data up to 4 years. Although SCS was considerably more effective compared with BMT, the substantial initial investment that is required resulted in SCS not being cost-effective in the short term. Cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to baseline cost imbalances between the groups and the depreciation period of the SCS material. PERSPECTIVE: Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and the humanistic and economic burden is high. This article presents the cost-effectiveness of SCS in patients suffering from painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy from a societal and health care perspective with a time horizon of 12 months.
Copyright © 2016 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Economic evaluation; cost-effectiveness analysis; cost-utility analysis; diabetic neuropathy; painful diabetic neuropathy; quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27965045     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2016.11.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  4 in total

Review 1.  Implanted spinal neuromodulation interventions for chronic pain in adults.

Authors:  Neil E O'Connell; Michael C Ferraro; William Gibson; Andrew Sc Rice; Lene Vase; Doug Coyle; Christopher Eccleston
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-12-02

2.  Effects of LncRNA BC168687 siRNA on Diabetic Neuropathic Pain Mediated by P2X7 Receptor on SGCs in DRG of Rats.

Authors:  Chenglong Liu; Jia Tao; Hui Wu; Yixin Yang; Qiang Chen; Zeyu Deng; Jiandi Liu; Changshui Xu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  Assessing the Effect of Including Social Costs in Economic Evaluations of Diabetes-Related Interventions: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Beatriz Rodriguez-Sanchez; Isaac Aranda-Reneo; Juan Oliva-Moreno; Julio Lopez-Bastida
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2021-04-29

Review 4.  Spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain: technical advances.

Authors:  Emil Isagulyan; Konstantin Slavin; Nikolay Konovalov; Eugeny Dorochov; Alexey Tomsky; Andrey Dekopov; Elizaveta Makashova; David Isagulyan; Pavel Genov
Journal:  Korean J Pain       Date:  2020-04-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.