Evoke闭环脊髓刺激治疗慢性腰腿痛的成本效用分析。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Clinical Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI:10.1097/AJP.0000000000001146
Rui V Duarte, Anthony Bentley, Nicole Soliday, Angela Leitner, Ashish Gulve, Peter S Staats, Dawood Sayed, Steven M Falowski, Corey W Hunter, Rod S Taylor
{"title":"Evoke闭环脊髓刺激治疗慢性腰腿痛的成本效用分析。","authors":"Rui V Duarte,&nbsp;Anthony Bentley,&nbsp;Nicole Soliday,&nbsp;Angela Leitner,&nbsp;Ashish Gulve,&nbsp;Peter S Staats,&nbsp;Dawood Sayed,&nbsp;Steven M Falowski,&nbsp;Corey W Hunter,&nbsp;Rod S Taylor","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The effectiveness of Evoke closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS), a novel modality of neurostimulation, has been demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The objective of this cost-utility analysis was to develop a de novo economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of Evoke CL-SCS when compared with open-loop SCS (OL-SCS) for the management of chronic back and leg pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A decision tree followed by a Markov model was used to estimate the costs and outcomes of Evoke CL-SCS versus OL-SCS over a 15-year time horizon from the UK National Health Service perspective. A \"high-responder\" health state was included to reflect improved levels of SCS pain reduction recently reported. Results are expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to assess uncertainty in the model inputs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evoke CL-SCS was estimated to be the dominant treatment strategy at ~5 years postimplant (ie, it generates more QALYs while cost saving compared with OL-SCS). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that Evoke CL-SCS has a 92% likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. Results were robust across a wide range of scenario and sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The results indicate a strong economic case for the use of Evoke CL-SCS in the management of chronic back and leg pain with or without prior spinal surgery with dominance observed at ~5 years.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c6/6c/ajp-39-551.PMC10498882.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-utility Analysis of Evoke Closed-loop Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Back and Leg Pain.\",\"authors\":\"Rui V Duarte,&nbsp;Anthony Bentley,&nbsp;Nicole Soliday,&nbsp;Angela Leitner,&nbsp;Ashish Gulve,&nbsp;Peter S Staats,&nbsp;Dawood Sayed,&nbsp;Steven M Falowski,&nbsp;Corey W Hunter,&nbsp;Rod S Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The effectiveness of Evoke closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS), a novel modality of neurostimulation, has been demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The objective of this cost-utility analysis was to develop a de novo economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of Evoke CL-SCS when compared with open-loop SCS (OL-SCS) for the management of chronic back and leg pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A decision tree followed by a Markov model was used to estimate the costs and outcomes of Evoke CL-SCS versus OL-SCS over a 15-year time horizon from the UK National Health Service perspective. A \\\"high-responder\\\" health state was included to reflect improved levels of SCS pain reduction recently reported. Results are expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to assess uncertainty in the model inputs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evoke CL-SCS was estimated to be the dominant treatment strategy at ~5 years postimplant (ie, it generates more QALYs while cost saving compared with OL-SCS). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that Evoke CL-SCS has a 92% likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. Results were robust across a wide range of scenario and sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The results indicate a strong economic case for the use of Evoke CL-SCS in the management of chronic back and leg pain with or without prior spinal surgery with dominance observed at ~5 years.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c6/6c/ajp-39-551.PMC10498882.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001146\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001146","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:Evoke闭环脊髓刺激(CL-SCS)是一种新型的神经刺激方式,其有效性已在一项随机对照试验(RCT)中得到证实。该成本效用分析的目的是开发一个新的经济模型,以评估Evoke CL-SCS与开环SCS(OL-SCS)在治疗慢性背痛和腿痛方面的成本效益。方法:从英国国家卫生服务局的角度,使用决策树和马尔可夫模型来估计15年内Evoke CL-SCS与OL-SCS的成本和结果。纳入“高反应者”健康状态,以反映最近报道的脊髓刺激疼痛减轻水平的改善。结果表示为每个质量调整寿命年(QALY)的增量成本。进行确定性和概率敏感性分析(PSA)以评估模型输入的不确定性。结果:Evoke CL-SCS被估计是植入后约5年的主要治疗策略(即,与OL-SCS相比,它在节省成本的同时产生更多的QALYs)。概率敏感性分析表明,Evoke CL-SCS在愿意支付20000英镑/QALY的门槛下具有92%的成本效益的可能性。在广泛的情景和敏感性分析中,结果是稳健的。讨论:研究结果表明,使用Evoke CL-SCS治疗慢性腰腿痛具有很强的经济可行性,无论是否进行过脊柱手术,在约5年时观察到优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Cost-utility Analysis of Evoke Closed-loop Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Back and Leg Pain.

Objectives: The effectiveness of Evoke closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS), a novel modality of neurostimulation, has been demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The objective of this cost-utility analysis was to develop a de novo economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of Evoke CL-SCS when compared with open-loop SCS (OL-SCS) for the management of chronic back and leg pain.

Methods: A decision tree followed by a Markov model was used to estimate the costs and outcomes of Evoke CL-SCS versus OL-SCS over a 15-year time horizon from the UK National Health Service perspective. A "high-responder" health state was included to reflect improved levels of SCS pain reduction recently reported. Results are expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to assess uncertainty in the model inputs.

Results: Evoke CL-SCS was estimated to be the dominant treatment strategy at ~5 years postimplant (ie, it generates more QALYs while cost saving compared with OL-SCS). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that Evoke CL-SCS has a 92% likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. Results were robust across a wide range of scenario and sensitivity analyses.

Discussion: The results indicate a strong economic case for the use of Evoke CL-SCS in the management of chronic back and leg pain with or without prior spinal surgery with dominance observed at ~5 years.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Journal of Pain
Clinical Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
118
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​The Clinical Journal of Pain explores all aspects of pain and its effective treatment, bringing readers the insights of leading anesthesiologists, surgeons, internists, neurologists, orthopedists, psychiatrists and psychologists, clinical pharmacologists, and rehabilitation medicine specialists. This peer-reviewed journal presents timely and thought-provoking articles on clinical dilemmas in pain management; valuable diagnostic procedures; promising new pharmacological, surgical, and other therapeutic modalities; psychosocial dimensions of pain; and ethical issues of concern to all medical professionals. The journal also publishes Special Topic issues on subjects of particular relevance to the practice of pain medicine.
期刊最新文献
Application of the IASP Grading System to Identify Underlying Pain Mechanisms in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study. Retrospective Analysis of Fibromyalgia: Exploring the Interplay Between Various Triggers and Fibromyalgia's Severity. Genicular Nerve Block for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Is Social Support Associated With Clinical Outcomes in Adults With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain? A Systematic Review. Narrative Accounts of Youth and Their Mothers With Chronic Headache: Application of a Socio-narratology Framework to Pain Narratives.
×
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