A Cost-Consequence Analysis of Pregabalin versus Usual Care in the Symptomatic Treatment of Refractory Low Back Pain

  • PDF / 183,401 Bytes
  • 15 Pages / 504.57 x 720 pts Page_size
  • 94 Downloads / 186 Views

DOWNLOAD

REPORT


ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

ª 2010 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.

A Cost-Consequence Analysis of Pregabalin versus Usual Care in the Symptomatic Treatment of Refractory Low Back Pain Sub-Analysis of Observational Trial Data from Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Clinics Carles Morera-Domı´nguez,1 Fe´lix Ceberio-Balda,2 Mariano Flo´rez-Garcı´a,3 Xavier Masramo´n4 and Vanessa Lo´pez-Go´mez5 1 2 3 4 5

Traumatology and Orthopaedic Surgery Unit, Hospital Universitario Mutua de Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain Rehabilitation Unit, Hospital de Urbamin, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain Rehabilitation Unit, Foundation Hospital Alcorco´n, Madrid, Spain Department of Biometrics, European Biometrics Institute, Barcelona, Spain Medical Unit, Pfizer Espan˜a, Alcobendas, Spain

Abstract

Background: Low back pain is one of the most common reasons for outpatient consultation in both the primary-care and specialized-care settings. However, few studies have explored the effect of pregabalin in this context. Objective: To prospectively analyse the effect of adding pregabalin on costs and consequences in the treatment of refractory low back pain in routine medical practice. Methods: A secondary analysis was carried out in patients aged ‡18 years with a 6-month history of chronic refractory low back pain who had participated in a previous prospective, naturalistic, 12-week, two-visit study (RADIO study). The analysis compared patients receiving pregabalin with those receiving usual care. Severity of pain, healthcare resources utilization, lost workday equivalents due to pain, and related cost-adjusted reductions were assessed. The year of costing for all cost data reported in the study was 2007. Results: Data from a total of 683 patients (49.5% women, mean age 55.0 years), 82.6% of whom were receiving pregabalin, were analysed. Pregabalin was associated with a higher covariable-adjusted reduction in severity of pain, i.e. mean (SD) -3.4 (2.0) compared with -2.0 (2.1) points with usual care on a 10-point neuropathic pain questionnaire (p < 0.001), and a 61.6% response rate (defined as ‡50% reduction in pain from baseline) compared

Morera-Domı´nguez et al.

518

with 37.3% with usual care (p < 0.001). This resulted in fewer lost workday equivalents in the pregabalin group versus usual care (27.8 vs 34.6, p = 0.002), which produced more significant adjusted reductions in indirect costs, i.e. mean (SD) -h961.8 (h1242.9) compared with –h625.8 (h1169.2) with usual care (p = 0.004). The cost of pregabalin, i.e. mean (SD) h303.8 (h175.8) compared with h37.1 (h97.0) for usual care (p < 0.001), was offset by larger reductions in the other cost components. While the adjusted total costs were substantially reduced in both groups, pregabalin-treated patients showed more significant reductions, i.e. mean (SD) -h991.5 (h1702.3) compared with -h579.3 (h2410.3) with usual care (p = 0.023). Conclusion: Compared with usual care, addition of pregabalin to existing therapy for refractory low back pain was associated with a larger reduction in pai