Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Gynecologic oncology research and practice Pub Date : 2017-08-22 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s40661-017-0048-7
Brandon-Luke L Seagle, Emily S Miller, Anna E Strohl, Anna Hoekstra, Shohreh Shahabi
{"title":"Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.","authors":"Brandon-Luke L Seagle,&nbsp;Emily S Miller,&nbsp;Anna E Strohl,&nbsp;Anna Hoekstra,&nbsp;Shohreh Shahabi","doi":"10.1186/s40661-017-0048-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To determine the cost-effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine (TAP) compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree structure with a 30.5 day time-horizon was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Base-case costs, probabilities, and QALY values were identified from recently published all-payer national database studies, 2017 Medicare fee-schedules, randomized trials, institutional case series, or assumed, when published values were not available. One-way, two-way and multiple probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The TAP strategy dominated the oral opioid-only strategy, with decreased costs and increased effectiveness. Specifically, the TAP strategy saved $235.90 under the base-case assumptions. Threshold analyses demonstrated that if the relative same-day discharge probability was ≥ 12% higher in the TAP group, then TAP was cost-saving over oral opioids-alone. Similarly, TAP was cost-saving whenever the costs saved by same-day discharge compared to admission were ≥ $1115.22. Cost-effectiveness of the TAP strategy was highly robust of a variety of sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TAP with liposomal bupivacaine was robustly cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds. Further, TAP was cost-saving compared to opioids-only when the same-day discharge rate among TAP users was greater than among opioid-only users.</p>","PeriodicalId":91487,"journal":{"name":"Gynecologic oncology research and practice","volume":"4 ","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40661-017-0048-7","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecologic oncology research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40661-017-0048-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: To determine the cost-effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine (TAP) compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer.

Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree structure with a 30.5 day time-horizon was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Base-case costs, probabilities, and QALY values were identified from recently published all-payer national database studies, 2017 Medicare fee-schedules, randomized trials, institutional case series, or assumed, when published values were not available. One-way, two-way and multiple probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results: The TAP strategy dominated the oral opioid-only strategy, with decreased costs and increased effectiveness. Specifically, the TAP strategy saved $235.90 under the base-case assumptions. Threshold analyses demonstrated that if the relative same-day discharge probability was ≥ 12% higher in the TAP group, then TAP was cost-saving over oral opioids-alone. Similarly, TAP was cost-saving whenever the costs saved by same-day discharge compared to admission were ≥ $1115.22. Cost-effectiveness of the TAP strategy was highly robust of a variety of sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions: TAP with liposomal bupivacaine was robustly cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds. Further, TAP was cost-saving compared to opioids-only when the same-day discharge rate among TAP users was greater than among opioid-only users.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经腹平面阻滞联合布比卡因脂质体与单独口服阿片类药物治疗早期子宫内膜癌腹腔镜子宫切除术后急性术后疼痛的比较:成本-效果分析
背景:比较经腹平面阻滞联合布比卡因脂质体(TAP)与单独口服阿片类药物治疗早期子宫内膜癌腹腔镜子宫切除术后急性术后疼痛的成本-效果。方法:采用30.5天时间范围的决策树结构进行成本效益分析,计算每个质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本效益比(ICER)值。基本病例的成本、概率和QALY值是从最近发表的全付款人国家数据库研究、2017年医疗保险费用表、随机试验、机构病例系列或假设中确定的,当公布的值不可用时。进行了单向、双向和多重概率敏感性分析。结果:TAP策略在口服阿片类药物策略中占主导地位,成本降低,效果提高。具体来说,在基本情况假设下,技术援助战略节省了235.90美元。阈值分析表明,如果TAP组相对当日出院概率≥12%,则TAP比单独口服阿片类药物节省成本。同样,当当日出院与入院相比节省的费用≥1115.22美元时,TAP是节省成本的。在各种敏感性分析中,TAP策略的成本效益是高度稳健的。结论:在传统的支付意愿阈值下,布比卡因脂质体的TAP具有很强的成本效益。此外,当TAP使用者的当日出院率高于阿片类药物使用者时,与仅阿片类药物使用者相比,TAP节省了成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Extra-uterine low grade endometrioid stromal sarcoma arising from ovarian endometriosis: a case report and review of the literature. Preferences of women with epithelial ovarian cancer for aspects of genetic testing. Safety and feasibility of contained uterine morcellation in women undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy. A small molecule inhibitor of the perinucleolar compartment, ML246, attenuates growth and spread of ovarian cancer. Response to pembrolizumab in a heavily treated patient with metastatic ovarian carcinosarcoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1