Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cephalalgia ; 38(8): 1455-1462, 2018 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29921140

RESUMEN

Background On-demand stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) by means of an implantable neurostimulation system has been shown to be a safe and effective therapy for treatment-refractory cluster headache patients. Our objective was to estimate changes in cluster headache medication cost observed in SPG-treated chronic patients. Methods Detailed patient-level data of 71 chronic patients treated with the Pulsante® SPG Microstimulator System were available from the Pathway R-1 Registry through 12 months' follow-up. We used utilization data of preventive and acute medications reported at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months to estimate annualized drug costs for SPG-treated patients and compared it to baseline. Cost estimates for all drug/dosage combinations were developed based on German medication prices for 2016. Results In the base case analysis, mean annual acute and preventive medication costs decreased from €14,178 to €6924 (-€7254; -51%), and €559 to €328 (-€231; -41%), respectively, leading to total estimated annual drug cost savings of €7484, 97% of which were attributable to acute medications. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that SPG stimulation for the treatment of chronic cluster headache is associated with pronounced reductions in cluster headache medication usage that might lead to sizable annual savings in medication costs.


Asunto(s)
Cefalalgia Histamínica/economía , Cefalalgia Histamínica/terapia , Costos de los Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/economía , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Analgésicos/economía , Analgésicos/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Humanos , Neuroestimuladores Implantables , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de Registros
2.
J Headache Pain ; 17: 43, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27102120

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating condition that is generally associated with substantial health care costs. Few therapies are approved for abortive or prophylactic treatment. Results from the prospective, randomised, open-label PREVA study suggested that adjunctive treatment with a novel non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) device led to decreased attack frequency and abortive medication use in patients with chronic CH (cCH). Herein, we evaluate whether nVNS is cost-effective compared with the current standard of care (SoC) for cCH. METHODS: A pharmacoeconomic model from the German statutory health insurance perspective was developed to estimate the 1-year cost-effectiveness of nVNS + SoC (versus SoC alone) using data from PREVA. Short-term treatment response data were taken from the clinical trial; longer-term response was modelled under scenarios of response maintenance, constant rate of response loss, and diminishing rate of response loss. Health-related quality of life was estimated by modelling EQ-5D™ data from PREVA; benefits were defined as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Abortive medication use data from PREVA, along with costs for the nVNS device and abortive therapies (i.e. intranasal zolmitriptan, subcutaneous sumatriptan, and inhaled oxygen), were used to assess health care costs in the German setting. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in mean expected yearly costs of €7096.69 for nVNS + SoC and €7511.35 for SoC alone and mean QALY of 0.607 for nVNS + SoC and 0.522 for SoC alone, suggesting that nVNS generates greater health benefits for lower overall cost. Abortive medication costs were 23 % lower with nVNS + SoC than with SoC alone. In the alternative scenarios (i.e. constant rate of response loss and diminishing rate of response loss), nVNS + SoC was more effective and cost saving than SoC alone. CONCLUSIONS: In all scenarios modelled from a German perspective, nVNS was cost-effective compared with current SoC, which suggests that adjunctive nVNS therapy provides economic benefits in the treatment of cCH. Notably, the current analysis included only costs associated with abortive treatments. Treatment with nVNS will likely promote further economic benefit when other potential sources of cost savings (e.g. reduced frequency of clinic visits) are considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01701245 , 03OCT2012.


Asunto(s)
Cefalalgia Histamínica/terapia , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Estimulación del Nervio Vago/economía , Cefalalgia Histamínica/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Modelos Económicos , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Cephalalgia ; 33(16): 1283-91, 2013 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23814173

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been shown to be effective for selected patients with intractable headache disorders. We performed a prospective critical evaluation of complications and direct treatment costs. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with chronic cluster headache (CCH, N = 24) or chronic migraine (CM, N = 3) underwent a trial phase with bilateral ONS and subsequent implantation of a permanent generator (IPG), if responsive to treatment according to predefined criteria. Procedural and long-term complications as well as direct treatment costs of neuromodulation therapy of ONS were recorded over a mean follow-up period of 20 months (range 5-47 months). RESULTS: Twenty-five of 27 patients (93%) responded to treatment. Twenty-one complications in 14 patients were identified, necessitating reoperation in 13 cases. Overall treatment costs were €761,043, including hardware-related costs of €506,019, costs for primary hospital care of €210,496, and complications related to hospitalization costs of €44,528. This results in a per case-based cost of €9445 for hospitalization and €18,741 for hardware costs, totaling €28,186. CONCLUSION: ONS for treatment of refractory CCH and CM is a cost-intensive treatment option with a significant complication rate. Nevertheless, patients with refractory primary headache disorders may experience substantial relief of pain attacks, and headache days, respectively.


Asunto(s)
Cefalalgia Histamínica/terapia , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/efectos adversos , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/economía , Trastornos Migrañosos/terapia , Adulto , Cefalalgia Histamínica/economía , Terapia por Estimulación Eléctrica/métodos , Electrodos Implantados/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trastornos Migrañosos/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología
4.
Neurol Sci ; 30 Suppl 1: S43-7, 2009 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19415425

RESUMEN

In about 20% of chronic cluster headache (CH) cases, drugs may become ineffective. Under these circumstances, steroids and triptans are frequently employed leading to fearful side effects in one and high costs in the other. The direct costs of drug-resistant chronic CH are mainly due to frequent medical consultations and frequent use of expensive drugs. In recent years, hypothalamic stimulation has been employed to treat drug-resistant chronic CH patients suffering multiple daily attacks and long-term results from different centres show a 60% overall benefit. Nine years since the introduction of this technique, we attempt a preliminary analysis of the direct costs of hypothalamic stimulation based on patients treated at our centre. We estimated the following direct costs as follows: cost of neurosurgery plus cost of equipment (electrode, connection and impulse generator = 25,000 euro), cost of hospital admissions in long-term follow-up (2,000 euro per admission), cost of single sumatriptan injection (25 euro). Number of daily sumatriptan injections in the year before and for each year after hypothalamic implantation was obtained from headache diaries. To estimate the saving due to the reduction in sumatriptan consumption following hypothalamic stimulation, we calculated the following for each year of follow-up after surgery: number of sumatriptan injections in the year before surgery minus number of sumatriptan injections in each year, updated to December 2008. In our 19 implanted patients, the costs of neurosurgery plus cost of equipment were 475,000 euro; the costs of hospital admissions during follow up were 250,000 euro. Reduction in sumatriptan consumption resulted in a total saving of 3,573,125 euro. Hence, in our 19 patients, the sumatriptan saving (3,573,125 euro) minus the direct costs due to operation and follow up hospitalisations (475,000 + 250,000) euro is equal to 2,848,125 euro. These preliminary results indicate that hypothalamic stimulation is associated with marked reduction of direct costs in the management of complete drug-resistant chronic CH.


Asunto(s)
Cefalalgia Histamínica/economía , Cefalalgia Histamínica/terapia , Estimulación Encefálica Profunda/economía , Hipotálamo , Adulto , Cefalalgia Histamínica/cirugía , Resistencia a Medicamentos , Electrónica Médica/economía , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hospitalización/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Procedimientos Neuroquirúrgicos/economía , Sumatriptán/economía , Sumatriptán/uso terapéutico , Vasoconstrictores/economía , Vasoconstrictores/uso terapéutico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA