This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1545968308328724v1 23/6/546    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bensmail, D. Articles by Beresniak, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bensmail, D. Articles by Beresniak, A. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cost-effectiveness Modeling of Intrathecal Baclofen Therapy Versus Other Interventions for Disabling Spasticity

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: aberesniak{at}datamining-international.com.

	Abstract

Objective. 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. Methods. 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. Results. 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 (59 391 vs 88 272; P < .001) and an overall more favorable cost-effectiveness ratio (75 204/success vs 148 822/success; P < .001), compared with conventional medical management without ITB. Conclusion. 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.

First published on February 19, 2009, doi:10.1177/1545968308328724

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23:546.

A more recent version of this article appeared on July 1, 2009


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?