首页> 外文期刊>Global spine journal. >Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections: A 3-Month PilotStudy
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections: A 3-Month PilotStudy

机译:宫颈硬膜外类固醇注射的成本-效果:3个月的试验研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Study Design: Retrospective cohort. Objectives: 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. Methods: 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. Results: The ESI cohort experienced significant ( P .01) improvement in the EQ-5D score while the control cohort did not (0.13 vs 0.02 QALYs, respectively; P = .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) ( P .01). The ICER for an ESI versus conservative management was negative, indicating that ESIs provide greater improvement in QOL at a lower cost. Conclusions: 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.
机译:研究设计:回顾性队列。目的:关于颈硬膜外类固醇注射剂(ESI)的短期和长期生活质量(QOL)结局和成本效益的报道相互矛盾。本研究分析了短期内神经根病或颈痛患者的ESI与保守治疗的成本效益分析。方法:包括50例接受颈椎ESI治疗的患者和29例因颈椎神经根病和<6个月持续时间的颈部疼痛而接受物理疗法和止痛药治疗的患者。根据EuroQol-5维度(EQ-5D;以质量调整生命年[QALYs]衡量)评估三个月的术后健康结果。医疗费用是使用Medicare国家付款金额估算的。计算成本/效用比和增量成本效益比(ICER)来评估成本效益。结果:ESI队列的EQ-5D得分显着改善(P <.01),而对照队列则没有(分别为0.13 vs 0.02 QALY; P = .01)。队列之间的成本没有显着差异。 ESI队列的成本-效用比(21-884美元/ QALY获得)显着低于对照队列(176-412美元/ QALY获得)(P <.01)。与保守管理相比,ESI的ICER为负,表明ESI以较低的成本提供了更大的QOL改善。结论:ESIs可在3个月内为患有颈神经根病和颈部疼痛的患者提供QOL的显着改善。与单独的保守管理相比,ESI在短期内更具成本效益。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。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号