Cost-utility analysis of transcranial direct current stimulation therapy with and without virtual illusion for neuropathic pain for adults with spinal cord injury in Canada.

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a cost-utility analysis comparing virtual illusion (VI) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combination therapy, tDCS alone and standard pharmacological care in Ontario, Canada from a societal perspective over a three-month time horizon.

DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis using Markov model methods.

SETTING

Community setting in Ontario, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain (NP) resistant to pharmacological therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Virtual illusion and transcranial direct current stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation alone and standard pharmacological therapy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental costs, quality adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of VI and tDCS therapy cost is $3,396 per QALY (2020 Canadian dollars) when compared to standard care. The incremental cost per QALY of tDCS therapy alone is $33,167. VI and tDCS therapy had lower incremental costs (-$519) and higher incremental QALYs (0.026) compared to tDCS alone. From a public healthcare payer perspective, there is a 74% probability that VI and tDCS therapy and 54% probability that tDCS alone would be cost effective at a $50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Our findings remained relatively robust in various scenario analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that at three-months after therapy, VI and tDCS combination therapy may be more cost effective than tDCS therapy alone. Based on conventional health technology funding thresholds, VI and tDCS combination therapy merits consideration for the treatment of NP in adults with spinal cord injuries.