Potential Cost Savings with 60-day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Treatment in Chronic Axial Low Back Pain.

Autor: Sheth SJ; Sutter Health, Roseville, CA, USA., Mauck WD; The Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA., Russo DP; Columbia Pain Management, Hood River, OR, USA., Keuffel EL; Health Finance and Access Initiative, Ardmore, PA, USA. ekeuffel@hfaai.net., Gunnarsson CL; Gunnarsson Consulting, Jupiter, FL, USA., Stultz M; SPR Therapeutics, Cleveland, OH, USA., McGee MJ; SPR Therapeutics, Cleveland, OH, USA., Huntoon MA; SPR Therapeutics, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Pain and therapy [Pain Ther] 2024 Oct; Vol. 13 (5), pp. 1187-1202. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 09.
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-024-00630-5
Abstrakt: Introduction: Chronic axial low back pain (CLBP) that is not responsive to medication management or physical therapy often requires significant clinical intervention. Several interventional pain management options exist, including a 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) treatment. This economic evaluation investigated the potential for projected cost savings associated with prioritizing 60-day PNS treatment relative to a 'standard of care' (SOC) approach (where patients do not have access to 60-day PNS).
Methods: A decision tree (supervised machine learning) model tracked treatment progression across two hypothetical cohorts of US patients with CLBP in whom non-interventional options were ineffective (Cohort A: treatment starting with 60-day PNS followed by any additional interventional and surgical treatments versus Cohort B: standard of care interventional and surgical treatments without access to 60-day PNS). Treatment efficacy estimates were based on published success rates. Conditional on treatment failure, up to two additional interventions were considered within the 12-month time frame in both cohorts. SOC treatment options included epidural injection, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA), PNS permanent implant (PNS-PI), spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trial/implant, and spinal fusion surgery. Treatment choice probabilities in both cohort algorithms were based on clinician interviews. Costs were based on national Medicare reimbursement levels in the ambulatory surgery center (ASC) setting. Savings reflected the difference in projected costs between cohorts. A Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analyses were conducted to generate confidence intervals and identify important inputs.
Results: The treatment algorithm which prioritized initial 60-day PNS treatment was projected to save $8056 (95% CI $6112-$9981) per patient during the first year of interventional treatment relative to the SOC approach.
Conclusions: Use of the 60-day PNS treatment as an initial interventional treatment in patients with CLBP may result in significant savings for Medicare. Projected savings may be even larger for commercial payers covering non-Medicare patients.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje