Maiese Brett A, Pham An T, Shah Manasee V, Eaddy Michael T, Lunacsek Orsolya E, Wan George J
Xcenda LLC, Palm Harbor, FL, USA.
Health Economics and Outcomes Research Department, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Hampton, NJ, USA.
Adv Ther. 2017 Feb;34(2):421-435. doi: 10.1007/s12325-016-0449-8. Epub 2016 Dec 10.
To assess the impact on hospitalization costs of multimodal analgesia (MMA), including intravenous acetaminophen (IV-APAP), versus IV opioid monotherapy for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Utilizing the Truven Health MarketScan Hospital Drug Database (HDD), patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total hip arthroplasty (THA), or surgical repair of hip fracture between 1/1/2011 and 8/31/2014 were separated into postoperative pain management groups: MMA with IV-APAP plus other IV analgesics (IV-APAP group) or an IV opioid monotherapy group. All patients could have received oral analgesics. Baseline characteristics and total hospitalization costs were compared. Additionally, an inverse probability treatment weighting [IPTW] with propensity scores analysis further assessed hospitalization cost differences.
The IV-APAP group (n = 33,954) and IV opioid monotherapy group (n = 110,300) differed significantly (P < 0.0001) across baseline characteristics, though the differences may not have been clinically meaningful. Total hospitalization costs (mean ± standard deviation) were significantly lower for the IV-APAP group than the IV opioid monotherapy group (US$12,540 ± $9564 vs. $13,242 ± $35,825; P < 0.0001). Medical costs accounted for $701 of the $702 between-group difference. Pharmacy costs were similar between groups. Results of the IPTW-adjusted analysis further supported the statistically significant cost difference.
Patients undergoing orthopedic surgery who received MMA for postoperative pain management, including IV-APAP, had significantly lower total costs than patients who received IV opioid monotherapy. This difference was driven by medical costs; importantly, there was no difference in pharmacy costs. Generalizability of the results may be limited to patients admitted to hospitals similar to those included in HDD. Dosing could not be determined, so it was not possible to quantify utilization of IV-APAP or ascertain differences in opioid consumption between the 2 groups. This study did not account for healthcare utilization post-discharge.
评估多模式镇痛(MMA),包括静脉注射对乙酰氨基酚(IV-APAP),与静脉注射阿片类药物单一疗法相比,对接受骨科手术患者术后疼痛管理住院费用的影响。
利用Truven Health MarketScan医院药品数据库(HDD),将2011年1月1日至2014年8月31日期间接受全膝关节置换术(TKA)、全髋关节置换术(THA)或髋部骨折手术修复的患者分为术后疼痛管理组:使用IV-APAP加其他静脉镇痛药的MMA组(IV-APAP组)或静脉注射阿片类药物单一疗法组。所有患者均可接受口服镇痛药。比较基线特征和总住院费用。此外,采用倾向得分分析的逆概率治疗加权法(IPTW)进一步评估住院费用差异。
IV-APAP组(n = 33,954)和静脉注射阿片类药物单一疗法组(n = 110,300)在基线特征上存在显著差异(P < 0.0001),尽管这些差异可能没有临床意义。IV-APAP组的总住院费用(平均值±标准差)显著低于静脉注射阿片类药物单一疗法组(12,540美元±9564美元对13,242美元±35,825美元;P < 0.0001)。医疗费用占两组之间702美元差异中的701美元。两组之间的药房费用相似。IPTW调整分析的结果进一步支持了具有统计学意义的费用差异。
接受MMA进行术后疼痛管理(包括IV-APAP)的骨科手术患者的总费用显著低于接受静脉注射阿片类药物单一疗法的患者。这种差异是由医疗费用驱动的;重要的是,药房费用没有差异。结果的普遍性可能仅限于入住与HDD中所包括医院类似的医院的患者。由于无法确定剂量,因此无法量化IV-APAP的使用情况或确定两组之间阿片类药物消耗量的差异。本研究未考虑出院后的医疗保健利用情况。