Does gabapentin provide benefit for patients with knee OA? A benefit-harm and cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Gabapentin can treat neuropathic pain syndromes and has increasingly been prescribed to treat nociplastic pain. Some patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) suffer from both nociceptive and nociplastic pain. We examined the cost-effectiveness of adding gabapentin to knee OA care. METHOD: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo simulation of knee OA, to examine the value of gabapentin in treating knee OA by comparing three strategies: 1) usual care, gabapentin sparing (UC-GS); 2) targeted gabapentin (TG), which provides gabapentin plus usual care for those who screen positive for nociplastic pain on the modified PainDETECT questionnaire (mPD-Q) and usual care only for those who screen negative; and 3) universal gabapentin plus usual care (UG). Outcomes included cumulative quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime direct medical costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 3% annually. We derived model inputs from published literature and national databases and varied key input parameters in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: UC-GS dominated both gabapentin-containing strategies, as it led to lower costs and more QALYs. TG resulted in a cost increase of $689 and a cumulative QALY reduction of 0.012 QALYs. UG resulted in a further $1,868 cost increase and 0.036 QALY decrease. The results were robust to plausible changes in input parameters. The lowest TG strategy ICER of $53,000/QALY was reported when mPD-Q specificity was increased to 100% and AE rate was reduced to 0%. CONCLUSION: Incorporating gabapentin into care for patients with knee OA does not appear to offer good value.

Effectiveness of remote exercise programs in reducing pain for patients with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review of randomized trials.

Objective: Remote knee osteoarthritis (OA) management programs are becoming more popular. This systematic review examined the efficacy of remote exercise programs for relieving pain in persons with knee OA. Design: We conducted a search of studies published between January 1st, 2013 to March 31st, 2021 in PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE. We included randomized trials of patients with knee OA or chronic knee pain, studying interventions with an element of telehealth exercise management, and evaluating knee pain as an outcome. Interventions could include fully remote or both remote and in-person components. We excluded observational cohort studies, pilot studies, and studies with poor Physiotherapy Exercise Database (PEDro) scores. Two reviewers extracted pain data, consisting of mean differences from baseline and between groups, and compared them to minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds. Results: We identified 1867 reports, of which eleven trials with a total of 1861 participants met inclusion criteria. Only one trial demonstrated a clinically meaningful change from baseline between groups. Four interventions were found to result in clinically meaningful improvements in pain from baseline. Conclusion: This review was limited by variability in outcome measures, intervention content, and comparators. One trial with an inactive control demonstrated clinically meaningful between group differences in pain. All four interventions demonstrating meaningful improvements from baseline included study-initiated communications to discuss and personalize remotely delivered exercise programs. More studies comparing fully or partially remote exercise programs with both active and inactive controls could help optimize the use of remote programs for management of knee OA pain.