The effect of continuity of care on medical costs in patients with chronic shoulder pain.

Unnecessary surgery could be prevented through continuity of care (COC). The present study aimed to investigate the relationships between COC, surgery and cost associated with chronic shoulder pain. We used the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service national patient sample (HIRA-NPS) in 2017. A total of 1717 patients were included. Bice-Boxerman Continuity of Care Index was used as the indicator for measuring the COC. Occurrence of surgery, associated costs, and direct medical costs were analysed. Logistic regression, a two-part model with recycled predictions and generalized linear model with gamma distribution were used. The majority of patients were 40-65 years old (high COC: 68.4%; low COC: 64.4%). The odds ratio (OR) for surgery was 0.41 in the high-COC group compared to the low COC group (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.84). Direct medical cost was 14.09% (95% CI, 8.12% to 19.66%) and 58.00% lower in surgery cost (95% CI, 57.95 to 58.05) in the high-COC group. Interaction with COC and shoulder impingement syndrome was significant lower in direct medical cost (15.05% [95% CI, 1.81% to 26.51%]). High COC was associated with low medical cost in patients diagnosed with chronic shoulder pain.

Factors Associated With the Cost of Care for the Most Common Atraumatic Painful Upper Extremity Conditions.

PURPOSE: To help strategize efforts to optimize value (relative improvement in health for resources invested), we analyzed the factors associated with the cost of care and use of resources for painful, nontraumatic conditions of the upper extremity. METHODS: The following were the most common upper extremity diagnoses in the Truven Health MarketScan database: shoulder pain and rotator cuff tendinopathy, shoulder stiffness, shoulder arthritis, lateral epicondylitis, hand arthritis, trigger finger, wrist pain, and hand pain. Multivariable generalized linear regression models were constructed accounting for sex, age, employment status, enrollment year, payer type, emergency room visit, joint injection, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), physical or occupational therapy, outpatient and inpatient surgery, and insurance type. In addition, we assessed the use of the following 4 diagnostic and treatment interventions: joint injection, surgery, MRI, and physical or occupational therapy. RESULTS: Inpatient and outpatient surgery are the largest contributors to the total amount paid for most diagnoses. Older patients had more injections for the majority of conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to improve the value of care for nontraumatic upper extremity pain can focus on the relative benefits of surgery compared with other treatments and interventions to lower the costs of surgery (eg, office surgery and limited draping for minor hand surgery). TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic II.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a placebo-controlled randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of arthroscopic subacromial decompression in patients with subacromial shoulder pain.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to compare the use of resources, costs, and quality of life outcomes associated with subacromial decompression, arthroscopy only (placebo surgery), and no treatment for subacromial pain in the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS), and to estimate their cost-effectiveness. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The use of resources, costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assessed in the trial at six months and one year. Results were extrapolated to two years after randomization. Differences between treatment arms, based on the intention-to-treat principle, were adjusted for covariates and missing data were handled using multiple imputation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, with uncertainty around the values estimated using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Cumulative mean QALYs/mean costs of health care service use and surgery per patient from baseline to 12 months were estimated as 0.640 (standard error (se) 0.024)/£3147 (se 166) in the decompression arm, 0.656 (se 0.020)/£2830 (se 183) in the arthroscopy only arm and 0.522 (se 0.029)/£1451 (se 151) in the no treatment arm. Statistically significant differences in cumulative QALYs and costs were found at six and 12 months for the decompression versus no treatment comparison only. The probabilities of decompression being cost-effective compared with no treatment at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY were close to 0% at six months and approximately 50% at one year, with this probability potentially increasing for the extrapolation to two years. DISCUSSION: The evidence for cost-effectiveness at 12 months was inconclusive. Decompression could be cost-effective in the longer-term, but results of this analysis are sensitive to the assumptions made about how costs and QALYs are extrapolated beyond the follow-up of the trial.

Shoulder pain cost-of-illness in patients referred for public orthopaedic care in Australia.

Objective The aim of this study was to calculate the societal economic burden of shoulder pain in patients on the orthopaedic waiting list at an Australian public hospital and calculate the cost (from the government's perspective) of care delivered by the hospital for those patients. Methods A cost-of-illness analysis was undertaken in a cohort of 277 orthopaedic patients on the Gold Coast in Australia. Outcomes included a health care costs and impacts questionnaire, work absenteeism, presenteeism questionnaires (Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI)) and hospital care provision over a 2-year period. Results The mean societal cost of healthcare and domestic support was AU$20.72 per day (AU$7563 annually) per patient on the orthopaedic waiting list. When absenteeism and presenteeism were included, the cost per patient who was employed was AU$38.04 per day (AU$13885 annually) calculated with the WLQ and AU$61.31 per day (AU$22378 annually) calculated with the WPAI. The mean per-patient cost to government of public hospital care was AU$2622 in Year 1 and AU$3835.78 (s.d. 4961.28) over 2 years. The surgical conversion rate was 22%, and 51% of hospital care cost was attributable to outpatient services. Conclusions Public orthopaedic shoulder waiting lists create a large economic burden for society; few referrals require surgery and just over half the hospital care costs are for out-patient services. New models of care that better manage shoulder pain and identify surgical candidates before orthopaedic referral could reduce this burden. What is known about the topic? Little is known about the cost of shoulder pain in Australia, or the cost of patients referred for public orthopaedic care. What does this paper add? This article quantifies the costs of shoulder pain and the value of lost production from shoulder pain. The time spent waiting for public hospital orthopaedic appointments and the costs associated with waiting demonstrate that the time spent on a waiting list is a key driver of the economic burden. What are the implications for practitioners? Greater resourcing to reduce public orthopaedic shoulder waiting lists may be helpful, but system change is also required. Earlier and more accurate identification of surgical cases could reduce inefficient referrals and improve hospital productivity. Collaboration between clinicians and policy makers is needed to design more economically efficient shoulder care.

Living status, economic hardship and sleep disturbance were associated with subjective shoulder pain in survivors of the Great East Japan Earthquake: A cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Great East Japan Earthquake and devastating Tsunami hit hard everything on the northeastern coast of Japan. This study aimed to determine socio-psychological factors for "subjective shoulder pain" of the survivors at 2 years evaluated by a self-report questionnaire. METHODS: Between November 2012 to February 2013, survivors replied to the self-report questionnaire, and 2275 people consented to join this study. Living status was divided into 5 categories (1. same house as before the earthquake (reference group), 2. temporary small house, 3. apartment, 4. house of relatives or acquaintance, 5. new house) and economic hardship was divided into 4 categories (1. normal (reference group), 2. a little bit hard, 3. hard, 4. very hard). Gender, age, body mass index, living areas, smoking and drinking habits, complications of diabetes mellitus and cerebral stroke, working status, and walking time were considered as the confounding factors. Kessler Psychological Distress Scale of ≥10/24 and Athens Insomnia Scale of ≥6/24 points were defined as a presence of psychological distress and sleep disturbance, respectively. We used multiple logistic regression analysis to examine the association of shoulder pain with living environment, economic hardship, psychological distress, and sleep disturbance at 2 years after the earthquake. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the risk of having shoulder pain in those with "apartment" (OR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.03-2.96), "house of relatives or acquaintance" (OR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.42-6.25), economic hardship of "hard" (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.08-2.7) and "very hard" (OR = 2.51, 95% CI = 1.47-4.29), and sleep disturbance (OR = 2.96, 95% CI = 2.05-4.27). CONCLUSIONS: Living status of "apartment" and "house of relatives or acquaintance", economic hardship of "hard" and "very hard", and "sleep disturbance" were significantly associated with shoulder pain.

First-contact care with a medical vs chiropractic provider after consultation with a swiss telemedicine provider: comparison of outcomes, patient satisfaction, and health care costs in spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify differences in outcomes, patient satisfaction, and related health care costs in spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients who initiated care with medical doctors (MDs) vs those who initiated care with doctors of chiropractic (DCs) in Switzerland. METHODS: A retrospective double cohort design was used. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by first-contact care spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients who, 4 months previously, contacted a Swiss telemedicine provider regarding advice about their complaint. Related health care costs were determined in a subsample of patients by reviewing the claims database of a Swiss insurance provider. RESULTS: The study sample included 403 patients who had seen MDs and 316 patients who had seen DCs as initial health care providers for their complaint. Differences in patient sociodemographic characteristics were found in terms of age, pain location, and mode of onset. Patients initially consulting MDs had significantly less reduction in their numerical pain rating score (difference of 0.32) and were significantly less likely to be satisfied with the care received (odds ratio = 1.79) and the outcome of care (odds ratio = 1.52). No significant differences were found for Patient's Global Impression of Change ratings. Mean costs per patient over 4 months were significantly lower in patients initially consulting DCs (difference of CHF 368; US $368). CONCLUSION: Spinal, hip, and shoulder pain patients had clinically similar pain relief, greater satisfaction levels, and lower overall cost if they initiated care with DCs, when compared with those who initiated care with MDs.

The CSAW Study (Can Shoulder Arthroscopy Work?) - a placebo-controlled surgical intervention trial assessing the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthroscopic subacromial decompression for shoulder pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASAD) is a commonly performed surgical intervention for shoulder pain. The rationale is that removal of a bony acromial spur relieves symptoms by decompressing rotator cuff tendons passing through the subacromial space. However, the efficacy of this procedure is uncertain. The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ASAD in patients with subacromial pain using appropriate control groups, including placebo intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is a three-group, parallel design, pragmatic, randomised controlled study. The intervention content for each group (ASAD, active monitoring with specialist reassessment (AMSR) and investigational shoulder arthroscopy only (AO)) enables assessment of (1) the efficacy of the surgery against no surgery; (2) the need for a specific component of the surgery-namely, removal of the bony spur; and (3) quantification of the placebo effect. Concealed allocation was performed using a 1:1:1 randomisation ratio and using age, sex, baseline Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and centre as minimisation criteria. The primary outcome measure is the OSS at 6 months post randomisation. A total of 300 patients recruited over 24 months from a minimum of 14 UK shoulder units over 24 months were required to detect a difference of 4.5 points on the OSS (standard deviation, 9) with 90% power and to allow for 15% loss to follow-up. Secondary outcomes include cost-effectiveness, pain, complications and patient satisfaction. A substantial qualitative research component is included. The primary analysis will be conducted on the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Sensitivity analysis will be used to assess the robustness of the results with regard to the underlying assumptions about missing data using multiple imputation. DISCUSSION: This trial uses an innovative design to account for the known placebo effects of surgery, but it also will delineate the mechanism for any benefit from surgery. The investigational AO group is considered a placebo intervention (not sham surgery), as it includes all components of subacromial decompression except the critical surgical element. Some discussion is also dedicated to the challenges of conducting placebo surgery trials. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: UK Clinical Research Network UKCRN12104. Registered 22 May 2012. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial ISRCTN33864128 . Registered 22 June 2012. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01623011 . Registered 15 June 2012.

An experienced physiotherapist prescribing and administering corticosteroid and local anaesthetic injections to the shoulder in an Australian orthopaedic service, a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial and economic analysis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The early management of orthopaedic outpatients by physiotherapists may be useful in reducing public hospital waiting lists. Physiotherapists in Australia are prevented by legislation and funding models from investigating, prescribing, injecting and referring autonomously. This gap in service is particularly noticeable in the management of shoulder pain in early-access physiotherapy services, as patients needing corticosteroid injection face delays or transfer to other services for this procedure. This trial will investigate the clinical (decision making and outcomes) and economic feasibility of a physiotherapist prescribing and delivering corticosteroid and local anaesthetic injections for shoulder pain in an Australian public hospital setting. METHODS/DESIGN: A double-blinded (patient and assessor) non-inferiority randomised controlled trial will compare an orthopaedic surgeon and a physiotherapist prescribing and delivering corticosteroid injections to the shoulder. Agreement in decision making between the two clinicians will be investigated, and economic information will be obtained for estimating disease burden and an economic evaluation. The surgeon and the physiotherapist will independently assess patients, and 64 eligible participants will be randomised to receive subacromial injection of corticosteroid and local anaesthetic from either the surgeon or the physiotherapist. Post-injection, all participants will receive physiotherapy. The primary outcome measure will be the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index measured at baseline, and at 6 and 12 weeks post-injection. Analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis and compared to a per-protocol analysis. A cost-utility analysis will be undertaken from the perspective of the health funder. DISCUSSION: Findings will assist policy makers and services in improving access for orthopaedic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: 12612000532808 First registered: 21 May 2012. First participant randomized: 16 January 2013.

Subacromial impingement syndrome and pain: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of exercise and corticosteroid injection (the SUPPORT trial).

BACKGROUND: Subacromial impingement syndrome is the most frequent cause of shoulder problems which themselves affect 1 in 3 adults. Management commonly includes exercise and corticosteroid injection. However, the few existing trials of exercise or corticosteroid injection for subacromial impingement syndrome are mostly small, of poor quality, and focus only on short-term results. Exercise packages tend to be standardised rather than individualised and progressed. There has been much recent interest in improving outcome from corticosteroid injections by using musculoskeletal ultrasound to guide injections. However, there are no high-quality trials comparing ultrasound-guided and blind corticosteroid injection in subacromial impingement syndrome. This trial will investigate how to optimise the outcome of subacromial impingement syndrome from exercise (standardised advice and information leaflet versus physiotherapist-led exercise) and from subacromial corticosteroid injection (blind versus ultrasound-guided), and provide long-term follow-up data on clinical and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: The study design is a 2x2 factorial randomised controlled trial. 252 adults with subacromial impingement syndrome will be recruited from two musculoskeletal Clinical Assessment and Treatment Services at the primary-secondary care interface in Staffordshire, UK. Participants will be randomised on a 1:1:1:1 basis to one of four treatment groups: (1) ultrasound-guided subacromial corticosteroid injection and a physiotherapist-led exercise programme, (2) ultrasound-guided subacromial corticosteroid injection and an advice and exercise leaflet, (3) blind subacromial corticosteroid injection and a physiotherapist-led exercise programme, or (4) blind subacromial corticosteroid injection and an advice and exercise leaflet. The primary intention-to-treat analysis will be the mean differences in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores at 6 weeks for the comparison between injection interventions and at 6 months for the comparison between exercise interventions. Although independence of treatment effects is assumed, the magnitude of any interaction effect will be examined (but is not intended for the main analyses). Secondary outcomes will include comparison of long-term outcomes (12 months) and cost-effectiveness. A secondary per protocol analysis will also be performed. DISCUSSION: This protocol paper presents detail of the rationale, design, methods and operational aspects of the SUPPORT trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN42399123.

Consumption of medical resources and outcome of shoulder disorders in primary health care consulters.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder disorders are common problems in primary health care. The course of disease of patients consulting for a new episode of a shoulder problem has been thought to be benign. In this prospective cohort study, we assessed the one-year consumption of medical resources and clinical outcome of shoulder disorders inclusive of all disease episodes. METHODS: All individuals consulting primary health care for shoulder disorder in a catchment area of more than 120 000 people were included. A composite questionnaire including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) was used to measure use of resources as well as shoulder pain and function. A follow-up assessment was performed after one year. RESULTS: A total of 128 individuals responded to the questionnaire. Only 24% of the patients had recovered after one year. Mean shoulder pain (Visual analogue scale, VAS, max 100 mm) decreased from 38.9 mm to 28.6 mm (95% CI -16.3 to -4.2 mm). The ASES score (max 100) improved significantly from 59.9 to 70.2 (95% CI 5.3 to 15.3). Mean one-year consumption of medical resources after the index consultation was 1.5 consultations, 0.5 radiological examinations, and 3.3 visits to physiotherapist. Mean resource-weighted direct costs were €543/patient/year (95% CI €351 to 735). CONCLUSIONS: Shoulder disorders are often chronic and require a significant amount of resources from the health care system. The clinical outcome of the management of shoulder disorders in our study population including also individuals who have consulted previously for a shoulder problem is notably poorer than the one reported by previous studies on new episodes. However, despite the relatively modest outcome, subjective disability is low.

Cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy after corticosteroid injection for moderate to severe shoulder pain due to subacromial impingement syndrome: a trial-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of subacromial corticosteroid injection combined with exercise compared with exercise alone in patients with moderate to severe shoulder pain from subacromial impingement syndrome. METHODS: A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis with 232 patients randomized to physiotherapy-led injection combined with exercise (n = 115) or exercise alone (n = 117). The analysis was from a health care perspective with 24-week follow-up. Resource use information was collected from all patients on interventions, medication, primary and secondary care contacts, private health care use and over-the-counter purchases. The measure of outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), calculated from EQ-5D responses at baseline and three further time points. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Mean per patient NHS costs (£255 vs £297) and overall health care costs (£261 vs £318) were lower in the injection plus exercise arm, but this difference was not statistically significant. Total QALYs gained were very similar in the two trial arms (0.3514 vs 0.3494 QALYs), although slightly higher in the injection plus exercise arm, indicating that injection plus exercise may be the dominant treatment option. At a willingness to pay of £20,000 per additional QALY gained, there was a 61% probability that injection plus exercise was the most cost-effective option. CONCLUSION: Injection plus exercise delivered by therapists may be a cost-effective use of resources compared with exercise alone and lead to lower health care costs and less time off work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register, http://www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn/, ISRCT 25817033.

A mixed methods study to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a self-managed exercise programme versus usual physiotherapy for chronic rotator cuff disorders: protocol for the SELF study.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is the third most common reason for consultation with a physiotherapist and up to 26% of the general population might be expected to experience an episode at any one time. Disorders of the shoulder muscles and tendons (rotator cuff) are thought to be the commonest cause of this pain. The long-term outcome is frequently poor despite treatment. This means that many patients are exposed to more invasive treatment, e.g. surgery, and/or long-term pain and disability.Patients with this disorder typically receive a course of physiotherapy which might include a range of treatments. Specifically the value of exercise against gravity or resistance (loaded exercise) in the treatment of tendon disorders is promising but appears to be under-used. Loaded exercise in other areas of the body has been favourably evaluated but further investigation is needed to evaluate the impact of these exercises in the shoulder and particularly the role of home based or supervised exercise versus usual treatment requiring clinic attendance. METHODS/DESIGN: A single-centre pragmatic unblinded parallel group randomised controlled trial will evaluate the effectiveness of a self-managed loaded exercise programme versus usual clinic based physiotherapy. A total of 210 study participants with a primary complaint of shoulder pain suggestive of a rotator cuff disorder will be recruited from NHS physiotherapy waiting lists and allocated to receive a programme of self-managed exercise or usual physiotherapy using a process of block randomisation with sealed opaque envelopes. Baseline assessment for shoulder pain, function and quality of life will be undertaken with the Shoulder Pain & Disability Index, the Patient Specific Functional Scale and the SF-36. Follow-up evaluations will be completed at 3, 6 and 12 months by postal questionnaire. Both interventions will be delivered by NHS Physiotherapist's.An economic analysis will be conducted from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective to evaluate cost-effectiveness and a qualitative investigation will be undertaken to develop greater understanding of the experience of undertaking or prescribing exercise as a self-managed therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN84709751.

Costs of shoulder pain and resource use in primary health care: a cost-of-illness study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Painful shoulders pose a substantial socioeconomic burden. A prospective cost-of-illness study was performed to assess the costs associated with healthcare use and loss of productivity in patients with shoulder pain in primary health care in Sweden. METHODS: The study was performed in western Sweden, in a region with 24 000 inhabitants. Data were collected during six months from electronic patient records at three primary healthcare centres in two municipalities. All patients between 20 and 64 years of age who presented with shoulder pain to a general practitioner or a physiotherapist were included. Diagnostic codes were used for selection, and the cases were manually controlled. The cost for sick leave was calculated according to the human capital approach. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore uncertainty in various factors used in the model. RESULTS: 204 (103 women) patients, mean age 48 (SD 11) years, were registered. Half of the cases were closed within six weeks, whereas 32 patients (16%) remained in the system for more than six months. A fifth of the patients were responsible for 91% of the total costs, and for 44% of the healthcare costs. The mean healthcare cost per patient was €326 (SD 389) during six months. Physiotherapy treatments accounted for 60%. The costs for sick leave contributed to 84% of the total costs. The mean annual total cost was €4139 per patient. Estimated costs for secondary care increased the total costs by one third. CONCLUSIONS: The model applied in this study provides valuable information that can be used in cost evaluations. Costs for secondary care and particularly for sick leave have a major influence on total costs and interventions that can reduce long periods of sick leave are warranted.

Avoidable costs of physical treatments for chronic back, neck and shoulder pain within the Spanish National Health Service: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Back, neck and shoulder pain are the most common causes of occupational disability. They reduce health-related quality of life and have a significant economic impact. Many different forms of physical treatment are routinely used. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of physical treatments which, despite the absence of evidence supporting their effectiveness, were used between 2004 and 2007 for chronic and non-specific neck pain (NP), back pain (BP) and shoulder pain (SP), within the Spanish National Health Service in the Canary Islands (SNHSCI). METHODS: Chronic patients referred from the SNHSCI to private physical therapy centres for NP, BP or SP, between 2004 and 2007, were identified. The cost of providing physical therapies to these patients was estimated. Systematic reviews (SRs) and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for NP, BP and SP available in the same period were searched for and rated according to the Oxman and AGREE criteria, respectively. Those rated positively for ≥70% of the criteria, were used to categorise physical therapies as Effective; Ineffective; Inconclusive; and Insufficiently Assessed. The main outcome was the cost of physical therapies included in each of these categories. RESULTS: 8,308 chronic cases of NP, 4,693 of BP and 5,035 of SP, were included in this study. Among prescribed treatments, 39.88% were considered Effective (physical exercise and manual therapy with mobilization); 23.06% Ineffective; 13.38% Inconclusive, and 23.66% Insufficiently Assessed. The total cost of treatments was € 5,107,720. Effective therapies accounted for € 2,069,932. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty percent of the resources allocated by the SNHSCI to fund physical treatment for NP, BP and SP in private practices are spent on forms of treatment proven to be ineffective, or for which there is no evidence of effectiveness.

Manipulative therapy in addition to usual medical care accelerates recovery of shoulder complaints at higher costs: economic outcomes of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder complaints are common in primary care and have unfavourable long term prognosis. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of manipulative therapy of the cervicothoracic spine and the adjacent ribs in addition to usual medical care (UMC) by the general practitioner in the treatment of shoulder complaints. METHODS: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized trial in primary care. Included were 150 patients with shoulder complaints and a dysfunction of the cervicothoracic spine and adjacent ribs. Patients were treated with UMC (NSAID's, corticosteroid injection or referral to physical therapy) and were allocated at random (yes/no) to manipulative therapy (manipulation and mobilization). Patient perceived recovery, severity of main complaint, shoulder pain, disability and general health were outcome measures. Data about direct and indirect costs were collected by means of a cost diary. RESULTS: Manipulative therapy as add-on to UMC accelerated recovery on all outcome measures included. At 26 weeks after randomization, both groups reported similar recovery rates (41% vs. 38%), but the difference between groups in improvement of severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain and disability sustained. Compared to the UMC group the total costs were higher in the manipulative group (€1167 vs. €555). This is explained mainly by the costs of the manipulative therapy itself and the higher costs due sick leave from work. The cost effectiveness ratio showed that additional manipulative treatment is more costly but also more effective than UMC alone. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve shows that a 50%-probability of recovery with AMT within 6 months after initiation of treatment is achieved at €2876. CONCLUSION: Manipulative therapy in addition to UMC accelerates recovery and is more effective than UMC alone on the long term, but is associated with higher costs. INTERNATIONAL STANDARD RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL NUMBER REGISTER: ISRCTN11216.

Shoulder acute pain in primary health care: is retraining GPs effective? The SAPPHIRE randomized trial: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of providing practical training to general practitioners (GPs) in shoulder problems, and administering a local anaesthetic (lignocaine) vs steroidal (cortisone) injection. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside a cluster randomized trial with a factorial design, in general practices across five centres within the UK. A total of 155 participant GPs were randomized to receive training or no training with 200 participants randomized to either lignocaine or cortisone. Health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY gained over 1 year estimated from a health system and a societal perspective were the main outcomes measured. RESULTS: Over 1 year, training GPs costs on average an additional pound sterling 211 (95% credibility interval - pound sterling 237, pound sterling 661) than no training and produces higher mean QALYs (0.075; -0.004, 0.154) per patient, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of pound sterling 2813 per QALY gained for trained GPs. Over the same period of 1 year, lignocaine costs an average of pound sterling 122 more (- pound sterling 232, pound sterling 476) than cortisone and produces virtually no differential gain in mean QALYs (0.001; -0.068, 0.070), yielding an incremental cost per QALY gained of pound sterling 122,000 for lignocaine compared with cortisone. Across a range of cost-effectiveness thresholds, cortisone is as cost effective to inject as lignocaine. The probability that training is cost effective is above 0.95 at thresholds above pound sterling 20,000. CONCLUSIONS: Providing practical training to GPs about shoulder problems is cost effective and there is little uncertainty regarding this decision. The choice between lignocaine and cortisone is more uncertain and it is likely that there is significant value of further research to reduce this uncertainty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number is 58 537 244.

Costs of shoulder pain in primary care consulters: a prospective cohort study in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is common in primary care, and has an unfavourable outcome in many patients. Information on the costs associated with health care use and loss of productivity in patients with shoulder pain is very scarce. The objective of this study was to determine shoulder pain related costs during the 6 months after first consultation in general practice METHODS: A prospective cohort study consisting of 587 patients with a new episode of shoulder pain was conducted with a follow-up period of 6 months. Data on costs were collected by means of a cost diary during 6 months. RESULTS: 84% of the patients completed all cost diaries. The mean consumption of direct health care and non-health related care was low. During 6 months after first consultation for shoulder pain, the mean total costs a patient generated were 689 euro. Almost 50% of this total concerned indirect costs, caused by sick leave from paid work. A small proportion (12%) of the population generated 74% of the total costs. CONCLUSION: The total costs in the 6 months after first consultation for shoulder pain in primary care, mostly generated by a small part of the population, are not alarmingly high.

A preliminary economic evaluation of percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation in the treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of various treatment modalities for hemiplegic shoulder pain. DESIGN: A stage II economic evaluation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost effectiveness ratio of P-NMES, compared to slings and anti-inflammatory injections. RESULTS: The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of p-NMES, compared to anti-inflammatory injections is 6,061 euro(+/-3,285). The incremental cost of the first quality-adjusted life year after implantation of the P-NMES device compared to anti-inflammatory injections is 33,007 euro (+/-5,434). This decreases to approximately 7,000 euro after 5 years, and to approximately 5,000 euro after 10 survival years. CONCLUSION: In this early evaluation, P-NMES seems to be cost-effective according to known guidelines. Treatment with P-NMES is recommended for patients with chronic HSP.

A cost consequences analysis of local corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy for the treatment of new episodes of unilateral shoulder pain in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Local steroid injections and community-based physiotherapy have been shown to be of similar benefit for treating shoulder pain presenting to primary care. This paper presents a cost consequences analysis of a prospective economic evaluation, conducted alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of corticosteroid injections versus physiotherapy for new episodes of unilateral shoulder pain, to determine the economic implications of injection versus physiotherapy. METHODS: A pragmatic RCT with 207 patients randomized to either physiotherapy (n = 103) or local steroid injection (n = 104) was conducted. The resource inputs required were identified for each treatment arm in terms of capital, staff and consumables. These were measured for the period up to 6 months post-randomization. Outcome measures included shoulder disability, shoulder pain, global assessment of health change and the EQ5D, all at 6 months. A sensitivity analysis was performed around the general practitioner minor surgical fee. RESULTS: Analysis is presented on the 199 patients for which the general practice record review (101 physiotherapy, 98 injection) was available. The total mean costs, per patient, were 71.28 pound sterling for the injection group and 114.60 pound sterling for the physiotherapy group. The difference in average total cost per patient was 43.32 pound sterling (95% bootstrap confidence interval: 16.21 pound sterling, 68.03 pound sterling ). This is a statistically significant difference in cost. Outcome was similar in both groups across all measures following intervention. Smaller mean differences in cost were observed between the treatment groups in the sensitivity analysis, but the difference remained in favour of injection over physiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown, given similar clinical outcomes across the treatment groups, that corticosteroid injections were the cost-effective option for patients presenting with new episodes of unilateral shoulder pain in primary care.