Literature DB >> 35352703

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

David H Smith1, Maureen O'Keeffe-Rosetti1, Michael C Leo1, Meghan Mayhew1, Lindsay Benes1,2, Allison Bonifay1, Richard A Deyo3, Charles R Elder1, Francis J Keefe4, Carmit McMullen1, Ashli Owen-Smith5,6, Connie M Trinacty7, William M Vollmer1, Lynn DeBar8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed.
OBJECTIVE: Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment.
DESIGN: Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.
SUBJECTS: Adults with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment (N=814). INTERVENTION: A cognitive behavioral therapy intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorists, nurses) with additional support from physical therapists, and pharmacists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per additional responder (≥30% improvement on standard scale assessment of Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity, and Sleep). Costs were estimated as-delivered, and replication.
RESULTS: Per patient intervention replication costs were $2145 ($2574 as-delivered). Those costs were completely offset by lower medical care costs; inclusive of the intervention, total medical care over follow-up was $1841 lower for intervention patients. Intervention group patients also had greater QALY and responder gains than did controls. Supplemental analyses using pain-related medical care costs revealed ICERs of $35,000, and $53,000 per QALY (for replication, and as-delivered intervention costs, respectively); the ICER when excluding patients with outlier follow-up costs was $106,000. LIMITATIONS: Limited to 1-year follow-up; identification of pain-related utilization potentially incomplete.
CONCLUSION: The intervention was the optimal choice at commonly accepted levels of willingness-to-pay for QALY gains; this finding was robust to sensitivity analyses.
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35352703      PMCID: PMC9106895          DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001713

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   3.178


  33 in total

Review 1.  The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire.

Authors:  M Roland; J Fairbank
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The PRECIS-2 tool: designing trials that are fit for purpose.

Authors:  Kirsty Loudon; Shaun Treweek; Frank Sullivan; Peter Donnan; Kevin E Thorpe; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-05-08

Review 3.  Long-term consequences of chronic pain: mounting evidence for pain as a neurological disease and parallels with other chronic disease states.

Authors:  Perry G Fine
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.750

4.  Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets.

Authors:  Ben van Hout; M F Janssen; You-Shan Feng; Thomas Kohlmann; Jan Busschbach; Dominik Golicki; Andrew Lloyd; Luciana Scalone; Paul Kind; A Simon Pickard
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Stavros Petrou; Chris Carswell; David Moher; Dan Greenberg; Federico Augustovski; Andrew H Briggs; Josephine Mauskopf; Elizabeth Loder
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  The economic costs of pain in the United States.

Authors:  Darrell J Gaskin; Patrick Richard
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 5.820

7.  Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris questionnaire.

Authors:  P W Stratford; J Binkley; P Solomon; E Finch; C Gill; J Moreland
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1996-04

Review 8.  Interpreting the clinical importance of group differences in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Michael P McDermott; Sarah Peirce-Sandner; Laurie B Burke; Penney Cowan; John T Farrar; Sharon Hertz; Srinivasa N Raja; Bob A Rappaport; Christine Rauschkolb; Cristina Sampaio
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  Development and initial validation of the PEG, a three-item scale assessing pain intensity and interference.

Authors:  Erin E Krebs; Karl A Lorenz; Matthew J Bair; Teresa M Damush; Jingwei Wu; Jason M Sutherland; Steven M Asch; Kurt Kroenke
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Deaths - United States, 2013-2017.

Authors:  Lawrence Scholl; Puja Seth; Mbabazi Kariisa; Nana Wilson; Grant Baldwin
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 17.586

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.