Bensmail D, Ward A B, Wissel J, Motta F, Saltuari Leopold, Lissens J, Cros S, Beresniak A
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Groupe Hospitalier R. Poincaré-Hôpital Maritime de Berck, AP-HP, Versailles-Saint Quentin University, Garches, France.
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 Jul-Aug;23(6):546-52. doi: 10.1177/1545968308328724. Epub 2009 Feb 19.
To assess by simulation the cost-effectiveness of intrathecal baclofen (ITB) therapy compared with conventional medical treatments for patients with disabling spasticity and functional dependence caused by any neurological disease.
Two models were created to simulate therapeutic strategies for managing severe spasticity, one with and one without the use of ITB, to assess various treatment sequences over 2 years based on current medical practices in France. Successful treatment at each evaluation was defined as a combination of: (1) the increased patient and caregiver satisfaction as assessed by goal attainment scaling (GAS), and (2) a decrease of at least 1 point on the Ashworth score. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed using 5000 Monte-Carlo simulations taking into account specific distribution curves for direct costs and effectiveness parameters in each treatment option.
The model simulations suggest that including ITB as a first option strategy in the management of function of severely impaired patients with disabling spasticity results in a higher success rate (78.7% vs 59.3%; P < .001). In addition, the ITB therapy model revealed a lower cost (pound 59,391 vs pound 88,272; P < .001) and an overall more favorable cost-effectiveness ratio (pound 75,204/success vs pound 148,822/success; P < .001), compared with conventional medical management without ITB.
Within the assumptions of our modeling, ITB therapy evaluated by a combination of treatment success criteria at 6-month intervals over a 2-year period may be a cost-effective strategy compared to conventional medical management alone.
通过模拟评估鞘内注射巴氯芬(ITB)疗法与针对因任何神经系统疾病导致残疾性痉挛和功能依赖患者的传统药物治疗相比的成本效益。
创建了两个模型来模拟管理严重痉挛的治疗策略,一个使用ITB,一个不使用ITB,以根据法国当前的医疗实践评估2年内的各种治疗顺序。每次评估时的成功治疗定义为以下两者的组合:(1)通过目标达成量表(GAS)评估的患者和护理人员满意度提高,以及(2)Ashworth评分至少降低1分。使用5000次蒙特卡洛模拟进行概率敏感性分析,同时考虑每个治疗方案中直接成本和有效性参数的特定分布曲线。
模型模拟表明,在管理严重残疾性痉挛功能受损患者时,将ITB作为首选策略可获得更高的成功率(78.7%对59.3%;P<.001)。此外,与不使用ITB的传统药物管理相比,ITB治疗模型显示成本更低(59,391英镑对88,272英镑;P<.001),总体成本效益比更有利(75,204英镑/成功对148,822英镑/成功;P<.001)。
在我们建模的假设范围内,与单独的传统药物管理相比,在2年期间每6个月通过治疗成功标准组合评估的ITB疗法可能是一种具有成本效益的策略。