Dataset Information

Pain Exposure Physical Therapy versus conventional treatment in complex regional pain syndrome type 1-a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To analyze cost-effectiveness of Pain Exposure Physical Therapy compared to conventional treatment alongside a randomized controlled trial (NCT00817128) in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1, where no clinical difference was shown between the two groups in an intention-to-treat analysis. DESIGN:Randomized controlled trial with 9?months follow-up. SETTING:Patients were recruited from hospitals and general practitioners in the region around a university hospital. SUBJECTS:A total of 56 patients, 45 (80.4%) female, were randomized. About 4 patients in the intervention and 11 patients in the conventional group switched groups. The mean (SD) age was 44.3 (16.6) years, and in 37 (66.1%) patients, the upper extremity was affected. INTERVENTIONS:Patients received either Pain Exposure Physical Therapy (maximum of five sessions), or conventional treatment conforming with the Dutch multidisciplinary guideline. MAIN MEASURES:For the economic evaluation difference between the groups in health-related quality of life (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), and the clinical outcomes Impairment level Sum Score-Restricted Version and Pain Disability was determined based on the intention-to-treat analysis as well as differences in both healthcare-related costs and travel expenses. Cost-effectiveness planes were constructed using bootstrapping to compare effects and costs. RESULTS:No significant effects were found for QALYs (mean difference?=?-0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.04) and clinical outcomes. A cost minimization analysis showed a significant difference in costs between groups. The conventional treatment was 64% more expensive than the Pain Exposure Physical Therapy. CONCLUSION:This economic analysis shows that Pain Exposure Physical Therapy compared to conventional treatment is cost-effective.

SUBMITTER: Barnhoorn K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5971370 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pain Exposure Physical Therapy versus conventional treatment in complex regional pain syndrome type 1-a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial.

Barnhoorn Karlijn K Staal J Bart JB van Dongen Robert Tm RT Frölke Jan Paul M JPM Klomp Frank P FP van de Meent Henk H Adang Eddy E Nijhuis-van der Sanden Maria Wg MW

Clinical rehabilitation 20180212 6

<h4>Objective</h4>To analyze cost-effectiveness of Pain Exposure Physical Therapy compared to conventional treatment alongside a randomized controlled trial (NCT00817128) in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1, where no clinical difference was shown between the two groups in an intention-to-treat analysis.<h4>Design</h4>Randomized controlled trial with 9 months follow-up.<h4>Setting</h4>Patients were recruited from hospitals and general practitioners in the region around a univer ...[more]

PMID: 29430970

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compared the cost-effectiveness of coadministration of a probiotic adjuvant with peanut oral immunotherapy (PPOIT) with placebo (no treatment) in children with peanut allergy.DesignProspectively planned cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised control trial.SettingThe Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.Participants56 children with peanut allergy aged 1-10 years at recruitment.InterventionA daily dose of probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus CGMCC 1.3724 (NCC4007) and peanut oral immunotherapy administered for 1.5 years.Main outcomes measuresCosts were considered from a healthcare system perspective and included costs of treatment delivery and adverse events. Effectiveness outcomes included rate of sustained unresponsiveness (SU) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The cost-effectiveness of PPOIT versus placebo was analysed using patient-level data. Time horizon was 10 years from commencement of PPOIT treatment, comprising 1.5 years of treatment (actual data), 4 years of post-treatment follow-up (actual data), and 4.5 years of extrapolation thereafter (modelling).ResultsHealthcare cost per patient over 10 years was higher for PPOIT compared with placebo ($A9355 vs $A1031, p<0.001). Over half of the per patient healthcare cost (53%) in the PPOIT group was attributable to treatment delivery, while the remaining cost was attributable to adverse events. Both measures of effectiveness were superior in the PPOIT group: the average SU rate over 10 years was 54% for PPOIT versus 6% for placebo (p<0.001); QALYs over 10 years were 9.05 for PPOIT versus 8.63 for placebo (p<0.001). Overall, cost per year of SU achieved was $A1694 (range $A1678, $A1709) for PPOIT compared with placebo, and cost per additional QALY gained was $A19 386 (range $A19 024, $A19 774).ConclusionsCost per QALY gained using PPOIT compared with no treatment is approximately $A20 000 (£10 000) and is well below the conventional value judgement threshold of $A50 000 (£25 000) per QALY gained, thus deemed good value for money ($A1= £0.5 approximately).Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000594325; Post-results.

Dataset Information

Pain Exposure Physical Therapy versus conventional treatment in complex regional pain syndrome type 1-a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Pain Exposure Physical Therapy versus conventional treatment in complex regional pain syndrome type 1-a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets