Alvin Matthew D, Mehta Vikram, Halabi Hadi Al, Lubelski Daniel, Benzel Edward C, Mroz Thomas E
The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Global Spine J. 2019 Apr;9(2):143-149. doi: 10.1177/2192568218764913. Epub 2018 Jul 31.
Retrospective cohort.
There are conflicting reports on the short- and long-term quality of life (QOL) outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cervical epidural steroid injections (ESIs). The present study analyzes the cost-effectiveness analysis of ESIs versus conservative management for patients with radiculopathy or neck pain in the short term.
Fifty patients who underwent cervical ESI and 29 patients who received physical therapy and pain medication alone for cervical radiculopathy and neck pain of <6 months duration were included. Three-month postoperative health outcomes were assessed based on EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D; measured in quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]). Medical costs were estimated using Medicare national payment amounts. Cost/utility ratios and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated to assess for cost-effectiveness.
The ESI cohort experienced significant ( < .01) improvement in the EQ-5D score while the control cohort did not (0.13 vs 0.02 QALYs, respectively; = .01). There were no significant differences in costs between the cohorts. The cost-utility ratio for the ESI cohort was significantly lower ($21 884/QALY gained) than that for the control cohort ($176 412/QALY gained) ( < .01). The ICER for an ESI versus conservative management was negative, indicating that ESIs provide greater improvement in QOL at a lower cost.
ESIs provide significant improvement in QOL within 3 months for patients with cervical radiculopathy and neck pain. ESIs are more cost-effective compared than conservative management alone in the shor -term. The durability of these results must be analyzed with longer term cost-utility analysis studies.
回顾性队列研究。
关于颈椎硬膜外类固醇注射(ESI)的短期和长期生活质量(QOL)结果以及成本效益,存在相互矛盾的报道。本研究分析了ESI与保守治疗相比,对神经根病或颈部疼痛患者短期的成本效益。
纳入50例行颈椎ESI的患者和29例仅接受物理治疗和止痛药物治疗、病程小于6个月的颈椎神经根病和颈部疼痛患者。术后3个月的健康结果基于欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D;以质量调整生命年[QALY]衡量)进行评估。医疗费用使用医疗保险国家支付金额进行估算。计算成本/效用比和增量成本效益比(ICER)以评估成本效益。
ESI队列的EQ-5D评分有显著改善(P <.01),而对照组没有(分别为0.13和0.02 QALY;P =.01)。两组之间的成本没有显著差异。ESI队列的成本效用比(每获得一个QALY花费21884美元)显著低于对照组(每获得一个QALY花费176412美元)(P <.01)。ESI与保守治疗相比的ICER为负数,表明ESI以更低的成本在QOL方面提供了更大的改善。
对于颈椎神经根病和颈部疼痛患者,ESI在3个月内可显著改善QOL。在短期内,ESI比单独的保守治疗更具成本效益。这些结果的持久性必须通过长期成本效用分析研究进行分析。