Dataset Information

A 5-Year Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Silicone Metacarpophalangeal Arthroplasty in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

ABSTRACT: There is a paucity of research evaluating the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for rheumatoid arthritis patients. Previous reports have challenged the sustainability of improved outcomes after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty. The authors conducted an economic evaluation of the long-term health outcomes after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty.The authors performed a 5-year prospective cohort study of 170 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (73 surgical and 97 nonsurgical). Objective functional measurements and patient-rated outcomes using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2 were collected at 3 and 5 years. A cost-effectiveness analysis using direct costs from Medicare outpatient claims data (2006 to 2010) was performed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for both the Michigan and Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2 measurements.At 5 years, the authors observed a statistically significant difference in upper extremity outcomes (Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire) between the two groups, with surgical patients having higher outcomes. Costs associated with improved outcomes 5 years after surgery were $787 to $1150 when measured by the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and $49,843 to $149,530 when measured by the Arthritis Impact scale. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios did not substantially increase with their observed surgical revision rate of 5.5 percent (approximately 4 percent increase in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) or with previously published long-term revision rates of 6.2 percent (approximately 6 percent increase in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio).Short-term improvements in upper extremity outcomes after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty are maintained over the 5-year follow-up period. These outcomes are achieved at a relatively low cost, even with the addition of potential surgical complications.

SUBMITTER: Squitieri L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4804714 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A 5-Year Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Silicone Metacarpophalangeal Arthroplasty in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Squitieri Lee L Chung Kevin C KC Hutton David W DW Burns Patricia B PB Kim H Myra HM Mahmoudi Elham E

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 20150801 2

<h4>Background</h4>There is a paucity of research evaluating the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for rheumatoid arthritis patients. Previous reports have challenged the sustainability of improved outcomes after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty. The authors conducted an economic evaluation of the long-term health outcomes after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty.<h4>Methods</h4>The authors performed a 5-year prospective cohort study of 170 patients with rheumatoid art ...[more]

PMID: 25909303

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSince receiving a positive recommendation in England, Wales and Scotland, tocilizumab (TCZ) is one of the options available to clinicians for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in the UK.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of adding TCZ to the current treatment sequence of RA patients from a UK payer's perspective over a patient lifetime horizon.MethodsAn individual sampling model was developed to synthesise all clinical and economic inputs. Two scenarios were explored separately: patients contraindicated to methotrexate (MTX) and those MTX tolerant. For each scenario, the analysis compared three strategies. The standard of care (SoC) strategy included a sequence of the most commonly prescribed biologics; the other two comparator strategies considered the addition of TCZ to SoC at first line and second line. Patient characteristics were representative of UK patients. Treatment efficacy and quality-of-life evidence were synthesised from clinical trials and secondary sources. An analysis of a patient registry informed the model parameters regarding treatment discontinuation. The safety profile of all treatments in a given strategy was based on a network meta-analysis and literature review. Resource utilisation, treatment acquisition, administration, monitoring and adverse event treatment costs were considered. All costs reflect 2012 prices. Uncertainty in model parameters was explored by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ResultsIn the MTX-contraindicated population, if TCZ was added to the SoC in first line, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £7,300 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained; if added in second line, the estimated ICER was £11,400 per QALY. In the MTX-tolerant population, the estimated costs and QALYs of the TCZ strategy were similar to those of the SoC strategy. Sensitivity analysis showed that parameters that affect the treatment cost (such as patient weight) can have a noticeable impact on the overall cost-effectiveness results. The majority of the other sensitivity analyses resulted in modest changes to the ICER.ConclusionFor the treatment of RA in MTX-tolerant and contraindicated patients, the addition of TCZ to the SoC was estimated to be a cost-effective strategy.

Project description:BackgroundArthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain.MethodsA parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0-10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles.ResultsTwo hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: - 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit.ConclusionThe trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131 ; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.

Project description:Introduction: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK-i), a class of targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tDMARDs), are suggested as second or third-line therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Synthesized cost-effective evidence would aid in informed decision-making given the similar clinical effectiveness of JAKi, but incongruent cost-effectiveness reports. Methods: Literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Medical Centers’ cost-effective analysis registry. We pooled the incremental net benefit (INB) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects model and the heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane-Q test and I2 statistic. Modified economic evaluation bias checklist was used to assess the quality of selected studies. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and Egger’s test. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment was performed to assess the certainty of outcomes presented. Results: We included seventeen relevant studies for systematic review, of which fifteen were eligible for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed that JAK-i is cost-effective compared to csDMARDS/bDMARDs with a pooled INB (INBp) of $19,886 (95% CI, 1,635 to 38,137) but with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 99.14). As a second-line treatment for csDMARD failed RA, JAK-i is cost-effective than csDMARD/bDMARD with a pooled INB of $23,144 (74.1–46,214) and high heterogeneity (I2 = 99.67). But on a separate analysis JAK-i as second-line treatment is not cost-effective than TNF-a-i (INBp = $25,813, -5,714 to 57,340). However, leave-one-out analysis found that omitting a single outlier makes JAK-i cost-effective. Further, JAK-i is not cost-effective as a third-line treatment for csDMARD-TNF-a-I failed RA, compared to csDMARDs/bDMARDs with INBp $26,157 (-7,284 to 59,598). Conclusion: Meta-analysis suggests that JAK-i is cost-effective when used after csDMARD failure but not cost-effective when used after csDMARD-TNF-a-i failure with low certainty of evidence. Clinical Trial Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021222541, identifier CRD42021222541

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib-containing treatment sequences versus sequences containing only standard biological therapies in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after the failure of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD-IR population) and in patients previously treated with methotrexate (MTX) who show an inadequate response to second-line therapy with any tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi-IR population). METHODS:A patient-level microsimulation model estimated, from the perspective of the Spanish Public NHS, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for treatment sequences starting with tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) followed by biological therapies versus sequences of biological treatments only. Concomitant treatment with MTX was considered. Model's parameters comprised demographic and clinical inputs (initial Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ] score and clinical response to short- and long-term treatment). Efficacy was measured by means of HAQ score changes using mixed treatment comparisons and data from long-term extension (LTE) trials. Serious adverse events (SAEs) data were derived from the literature. Total cost estimation (€, 2018) included drug acquisition, parenteral administration, disease progression and SAE management. RESULTS:In the csDMARD-IR population, sequences starting with tofacitinib proved dominant options (more QALYs and lower costs) versus the corresponding sequences without tofacitinib. In the TNFi-IR population, first-line treatment with tofacitinib+MTX followed by scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX proved dominant versus scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX; and tofacitinib+MTX?scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX versus scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX was less effective but remained a cost-saving option. CONCLUSIONS:Inclusion of tofacitinib seems a dominant strategy in moderate-to-severe RA patients after csDMARDs failure. Tofacitinib, as initial third-line therapy, proved a cost-saving strategy (€-?337,489/QALY foregone) in moderate-to-severe TNFi-IR RA patients. Key points • Therapeutical approach in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) consisted in sequences of several therapies during patient lifetime. • Treatment sequences initiating with tofacitinib followed by biological drugs provided higher health effects in csDMARDs-IR population, compared with sequences containing only biological drugs. • In both csDMARD-IR and TNFi-IR RA populations, initiating treatment with tofacitinib was associated to lower treatment costs for the Spanish National Health System.

Dataset Information

A 5-Year Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Silicone Metacarpophalangeal Arthroplasty in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Publications

A 5-Year Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Silicone Metacarpophalangeal Arthroplasty in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets