Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Neuromodulation ; 18(2): 141-9; discussion 149, 2015 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25145312

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the economic effects of intrathecal baclofen (ITB) for patients with severe spasticity based on costs of care before and after implantation of an intrathecal drug delivery system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An actuarial projection of post-implant experience in the absence of ITB intervention was used to simulate a continued conventional medical management protocol (ITB-free) by assuming a reasonable trend rate based on health-care industry standards. Cost projections were developed over a 30-year time horizon at various reimplantation rates. The model was informed by retrospective analysis of commercial administrative claims data from 409 pediatric and adult spasticity patients who received a pump implant (ITB-experienced) within a 3-year service period (January 2006 to January 2009). Common indications associated with pump implant included multiple sclerosis (N = 124), cerebral palsy (N = 131), and spinal cord injury (N = 40). RESULTS: ITB was less costly than the conventional protocol over our baseline implantation cycle. Costs in the month of implant and in the year following were cumulatively $26,375 more than with the conventional protocol. However, ITB financial break-even occurs between the second and third years post-implant. The lifetime analysis indicates that savings for ITB are $8009 per patient per year compared with conventional therapy. Most of the savings are derived from reductions in inpatient admissions, physician office visits, and outpatient physiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that spasticity patients receiving ITB would expect to experience a reduction in cumulative future medical costs relative to anticipated costs in the absence of a pump implant. This finding complements the existing literature on the cost-effectiveness of ITB.


Asunto(s)
Baclofeno/administración & dosificación , Baclofeno/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/economía , Relajantes Musculares Centrales/administración & dosificación , Relajantes Musculares Centrales/economía , Espasticidad Muscular/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Bases de Datos Factuales , Sistemas de Liberación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Espasticidad Muscular/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Adulto Joven
2.
Pain Med ; 14(4): 504-15, 2013 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23480485

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: As healthcare budgets continue to contract, there is increased payer scrutiny on the use of implantable intrathecal drug-infusion devices. This study utilizes claims data to evaluate the economic effects of intrathecal drug delivery (IDD) based on health services utilization and costs of care before and after implantation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective database study involving 555 noncancer pain patients that received an IDD system implant within a 3-year service period (1/2006-1/2009). IDD patient costs were temporally aligned to implant month and repriced to a standardized, national pricing schedule over a 6-year episode cycle (3 years preimplant, implant month, and 3 years postimplant). Additionally, we made an actuarial projection of postimplant experience, in the absence of IDD intervention, simulating a conventional pain therapy (CPT) protocol by assuming the same slope in costs prior to implantation at standardized, national price levels. Cost projections were produced over a 30-year time horizon at various reimplantation rates. RESULTS: IDD therapy was less costly than the CPT protocol over our baseline implantation cycle. Costs in the month of IDD implantation, and in the year following, are cumulatively $17,317 more than the CPT protocol; however, IDD financial break-even occurs soon after the second year postimplant. The lifetime analysis indicates that IDD per patient per year savings is $3,111 compared with CPT. CONCLUSION: The authors found that patients receiving an implantable IDD system may experience reduced cumulative future medical costs relative to anticipated costs in the absence of receiving IDD. This finding complements published literature on the cost-effectiveness of IDD.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides/economía , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Bombas de Infusión Implantables/economía , Inyecciones Espinales/economía , Manejo del Dolor/economía , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/economía , Adulto , Anciano , Analgésicos Opioides/administración & dosificación , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Bases de Datos Factuales , Implantes de Medicamentos/economía , Femenino , Humanos , Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA