A Registry of the Aetiology and Costs of Neuropathic Pain in Pain Clinics

[Impact of a multicomponent program with nonpharmacological therapies for patients with chronic pain]

INTRODUCTION

25.9% of Spanish people suffer from chronic pain. An integrated, interdisciplinary approach is recommended, with pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies, involving patients in their self-care.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and impact on resources of a program with non-pharmacological therapies in the control of non-oncological chronic pain in the short and medium term.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Quasi-experimental before-after study, follow-up 3-6 months, measuring: pain, well-being, quality of life, self-esteem, resilience, anxiety/depression (validated scales); patient-reported outcomes of workshop impact on pain management, habits and mood; ED and office visits; drug consumption and employment status.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-two patients completed the program; 131 (92.3%) were women, age: 56.0. Decreased: pain (scale 0-10) (start: 6.0; end of workshop: 4.0; 3 months: 5.0); anxiety (12.9; 10.4; 8.8) and depression (12.3; 7.23; 6.47) (scales 0-21). They increased: well-being (scale 0-10) (4.0; 6.0; 4.0); quality of life (scale 0-1) (0.418; 0.580; 0.536); health status (scale 0-100) (47.5; 60.0; 60.0); self-esteem (scale 9-36) (24.1; 27.5; 26.7); resilience (scale 6-30) (14.8; 17.4; 18.6). Patient-reported outcomes were performed by 136 patients at the end of the workshop and 79 at 3 months: pain decreased (end of program: 104, 76.5%; 3 months: 66, 83.5%); medication decreased (96, 76.2%; 60, 78.9%); habits improved (112, 88.2%; 69, 90.8%). Forty patients (37.4%) reduced visits to the emergency room, 40 (37.4%) reduced scheduled visits. Overall satisfaction: 9.8 out of 10.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients learn to mitigate their pain, participate in their self-care and improve their quality of life, self-esteem and emotional state. The effects remained for 3-6 months.

Cross-Sectional Evaluation of the Economic Burden on Patients Seeking Surgical Treatment for Chronic Nerve Injuries

INTRODUCTION

Little emphasis has been paid toward characterizing the socioeconomic burdens experienced by patients seeking treatment for chronic nerve injuries. The aim of this study was to characterize the direct and indirect costs faced by patients with chronic nerve injuries and their attendant health care utilization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was distributed to all patients (N = 767) from a single nerve surgeon's practice treated for chronic nerve injuries in the ambulatory setting between 2014 and 2020. Data collected included demographics, etiology, comorbidities, duration and severity of symptoms, history of prior medical and interventional treatments, work or school time lost due to injury or treatment, money spent on treatment, and health care utilization.

RESULTS

Of the 767 patients, 209 (27.2%) completed the survey. Average age was 48.8 (SD = 19.1) years, 68.9% female and 31.1% male. Patients with chronic nerve injury reported significant direct costs, indirect costs, and health care utilization associated with their nerve injury symptoms. Direct costs consisted of out-of-pocket spending (68.4% had spent >$1000 per year), physician specialists visits (71.3% had seen at least 4 specialists), and prior interventional procedures intended to address symptoms. Indirect costs included lost time from work or school (24.6% had missed more than 12 months). Health care utilization, represented by annual emergency room visits and hospitalizations related to nerve symptoms, was increased relative to the general population. Detailed statistics are presented in the manuscript.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic nerve injuries may be associated with a notable socioeconomic burden to the patient, including missed work or school, frequent physician visits and procedures, hospital visits, and out-of-pocket costs. Interdisciplinary algorithms recognizing a role for surgical evaluation in patients with chronic neuropathic pain due to underlying nerve injuries would facilitate future research into whether timely surgical intervention may reduce this economic burden.

Neuropathic Pain Registries Improve Pain Management and Provide More Efficacious Planning of Healthcare Services

The first official health registry dates back to the 19th century and was proven to be very useful for gathering important information regarding a specific disease. Since then, data collection through registries is gaining more popularity, as it can offer useful information not only to health providers but also to healthcare planning services. Health registries could come along with randomized controlled trials and support or reject their findings in the "real world". Pain registries and neuropathic pain registries have proven to be very potent weapons in the armory of the pain specialist and are growing rapidly, offering substantial information for this challenging pain entity.

Pain assessment in Spanish rheumatology outpatient clinics: EVADOR Study

INTRODUCTION

rheumatic diseases are the most frequent cause of non-malignant chronic pain. In recent years, pain and its management have become more important in rheumatology.

OBJECTIVES

to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of pain associated with rheumatic pathology treated in rheumatology clinics in Spain, as well as their treatment and response to it.

METHODS

Multicentre observational study with two phases (cross-sectional and prospective). Variables were collected from the doctor, patient, pain and its management, comorbidities, therapeutic response and related psychosocial aspects. The differences between de novo (NP) vs follow-up (FP) patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

34 centres and 1084 patients were included, 32% NP and 68% FP. Pain was present in 86%, was chronic in 81% and neuropathic in 12% of the surveyed population. Fifty percent of the patients would regard their pain as tolerable if its intensity according to the visual numeric scale (VNS) was≤2. Among the FP it was more frequent to have the perception of controlled pain (65.5% vs 49.4%) and to be satisfied with the treatment (53.3% vs. 35.6%). Of these patients, 23.5% had been treated with opioids in the previous month.

CONCLUSIONS

In the last decade, the prevalence of pain in rheumatology in Spain remains high, although it has diminished. The use of opioids, on the other hand, has increased.

Evaluation of Quality of Life and Satisfaction of Patients with Neuropathic Pain and Breakthrough Pain: Economic Impact Based on Quality of Life

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to assess the quality of life and satisfaction with treatment of patients with chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) who experience breakthrough pain (BTP) and to assess its economic impact.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observational study.

SETTING

Fifteen pain units from Spanish hospitals completed the study.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 124 patients with adequately controlled CNP who experienced BTP were enrolled into the study.

INTERVENTION

No interventions were required.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality of life was assessed using the SF12 v2 questionnaire, the results of which were used to calculate the estimated costs per patient and month and the SF-6D Health Utility Index. Patient satisfaction with treatment received for CNP and for BTP was assessed using a 10-point visual analogue scale. Other associated symptoms were analyzed using the ESAS (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System).

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 60.2 years (95% CI 58.4-63.3), and 46.8% (58) were males. 18.9% (23) experienced their first episode of BTP. A severe impairment of the physical component of SF12v2 was noted, with 94% of patients below the mean score of the population, while 88% had values lower than normal for the mental component. Mean cost per patient and month was $679 and was significantly greater in males ($763 versus $606), 4.96 times greater than in healthy population, and approximately double the cost of patients with CNP in Spain.

CONCLUSIONS

Occurrence of BTP in patients with CNP causes a substantial increase in healthcare costs which is significantly greater in older males.

Accuracy of Self-reported Prescribed Analgesic Medication Use: Linkage Between the Quebec Pain Registry and the Quebec Administrative Prescription Claims Databases

OBJECTIVES

The validity of studies conducted with patient registries depends on the accuracy of the self-reported clinical data. As of now, studies about the validity of self-reported use of analgesics among chronic pain (CP) populations are scarce. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of self-reported prescribed analgesic medication use. This was attained by comparing the data collected in the Quebec Pain Registry (QPR) database to those contained in the Quebec administrative prescription claims database (Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec [RAMQ]).

METHODS

To achieve the linkage between the QPR and the RAMQ databases, the first 1285 patients who were consecutively enrolled in the QPR between October 31, 2008 and January 27, 2010 were contacted by mail and invited to participate in a study in which they had to provide their unique RAMQ health insurance number. Using RAMQ prescription claims as the reference standard, κ coefficients, sensitivity, specificity, and their respective 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each therapeutic class of prescribed analgesic drugs that the participants reported taking currently and in the past 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 569 QPR patients responded to the postal mailing, provided their unique health insurance number, and gave informed consent for the linkage (response proportion=44%). Complete RAMQ prescription claims over the 12 months before patient enrollment into the QPR were available for 272 patients, who constituted our validated study population. Regarding current self-reported prescribed analgesic use, κ coefficients measuring agreement between the 2 sources of information ranged from 0.66 to 0.78 for COX-2-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, skeletal muscle relaxants, synthetic cannabinoids, opiate agonists/partial agonists/antagonists, and antimigraine agents therapeutic classes. For the past 12-month self-reported prescribed analgesic use, QPR patients were less accurate regarding anticonvulsants (κ=0.59), opiate agonists/partial agonists/antagonists (κ=0.57), and antimigraine agents use (κ=0.39).

DISCUSSION

Information about current prescribed analgesic medication use as reported by CP patients was accurate for the main therapeutic drug classes used in CP management. Accuracy of the past year self-reported prescribed analgesic use was somewhat lower but only for certain classes of medication, the concordance being good on all the others.

Modeling the predictive value of pain intensity on costs and resources utilization in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present analysis was to model the association and predictive value of pain intensity on cost and resource utilization in patients with chronic peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) treated in routine clinical practice settings in Spain.

METHODS

We performed a secondary economic analysis based on data from a multicenter, observational, and prospective cost-of-illness study in patients with chronic PNP that is refractory to prior treatment. Pain intensity was measured using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models were fitted to identify independent predictors of cost and health care/non-health care resource utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 1703 patients were included in the current analysis. Pain intensity was an independent predictor of total costs ([total costs]=35.6 [pain intensity]+214.5; coefficient of determination [R(2)]=0.19, P<0.001), direct costs ([direct costs]=10.8 [pain intensity]+257.7; R=0.06, P<0.001), and indirect costs ([indirect costs]=24.8 [pain intensity]-43.4; R(2)=0.20, P<0.001) related to chronic PNP in the univariate analysis. Pain intensity remains significantly associated with total costs, direct costs, and indirect costs after adjustment by other covariates in the multivariate analysis (P<0.001). None of the other variables considered in the multivariate analysis were predictors of resource utilization.

DISCUSSION

Pain intensity predicts the health care and non-health care resource utilization, and costs related to chronic PNP. Management of patients with drugs associated with a higher reduction of pain intensity may have a greater impact on the economic burden of that condition.

Clinical characteristics, patient-reported outcomes, and previous therapeutic management of patients with uncontrolled neuropathic pain referred to pain clinics

Background. The aim of this report was to evaluate the clinical profile and previous management of patients with uncontrolled neuropathic pain who were referred to pain clinics. Methods. We included adult patients with uncontrolled pain who had a score of ≥4 in the DN4 questionnaire. In addition to sociodemographic and clinical data, we evaluated pain levels using a visual analog scale as well as anxiety, depression, sleep, disability, and treatment satisfaction employing validated tools. Results. A total of 755 patients were included in the study. The patients were predominantly referred to pain clinics by traumatologists (34.3%) and primary care physicians (16.7%). The most common diagnoses were radiculopathy (43%) and pain of oncological origin (14.3%). The major cause for uncontrolled pain was suboptimal treatment (88%). Fifty-three percent of the patients were depressed, 43% had clinical anxiety, 50% rated their overall health as bad or very bad, and 45% noted that their disease was severely or extremely interfering with their daily activities. Conclusions. Our results showed that uncontrolled neuropathic pain is a common phenomenon among the specialties that address these clinical entities and, regardless of its etiology, uncontrolled pain is associated with a dramatic impact on patient well-being.

Pharmacoeconomic outcomes for pregabalin: a systematic review in neuropathic pain, generalized anxiety disorder, and epilepsy from a Spanish perspective

INTRODUCTION

Pregabalin is an anticonvulsant approved in Europe for the treatment of neuropathic pain, as an adjunct therapy for epileptic seizures, and recently for generalized anxiety disorder. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin associated with the treatment of its labeled indications from a societal perspective in Spain.

METHODS

Data from the MEDLINE database were searched using algorithms to identify relevant economic evaluations published in English or Spanish on pregabalin for the management of neuropathic pain, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and epilepsy in Spanish patients over the last 10 years.

RESULTS

In total, 52 potentially relevant abstracts were identified from the MEDLINE database. Twenty manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The majority of the selected papers (14/20) evaluated pregabalin for neuropathic pain from a societal perspective in Spain (5 economic models of pregabalin vs. gabapentin, 4 economic analyses of pregabalin in comparison with usual care, 4 economic evaluations comparing pregabalin monotherapy with add-on strategies, and one that evaluated different times of initiating pregabalin therapy). Five studies analyzed the use of pregabalin in Spain for the management of GAD (one cost-effectiveness model that compared pregabalin with venlafaxine, 2 secondary analyses in benzodiazepine-refractory patients, and 2 studies evaluating pregabalin vs. usual care in patients refractory to standard regimens). The last manuscript described a cost-effectiveness model that compared pregabalin versus levetiracetam use for the treatment of refractory partial epilepsy.

CONCLUSION

The majority of published evidence supports the possibility that pregabalin could be a cost-effective and/or cost-saving alternative for the treatment of refractory epilepsy, GAD, and neuropathic pain, in both treatment-naïve patients and in those who have demonstrated inadequate response or intolerance to previous therapy.

Cost savings associated with early initiation of pregabalin in the management of peripheral neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) is associated with significant economic burden. Guidelines recommend the early adoption of appropriate pharmacological interventions. The aim of this study was to explore whether early initiation of pregabalin was associated with lower economic burden, than later initiation, in the management of refractory chronic PNP.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a multicenter, observational cost-of-illness study was carried out in adults older than 18 years of age with refractory chronic PNP. Patients were pregabalin naive, with a poor response to previous analgesic therapy, defined as pain >40 in a 0 to 100 mm visual analog scale after, at least, 1 analgesic. The total costs, health care and indirect, assessed 12 weeks before the initiation of pregabalin were analyzed according to the time elapsed since diagnosis.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred thirty-nine outpatients, 59.3 (12.8) years old, 59.3% women, 2.0 (3.5) years with a diagnosis of PNP, fulfilled the criteria for analysis. Adjusted (pain intensity, sex, age, and body mass index) mean total costs 12 weeks before the baseline visit were significantly lower when pregabalin was initiated early (<6 mo; n=389) in comparison with later initiation; 6 to 12 months (n=328), or >12 months (n=422) after diagnosis; €2439 (2197; 2681) versus €3011 (2758; 3264) and €2945 (2717; 3173), respectively (P<0.01 in both cases). Lower health care costs and fewer lost-workday equivalents with early initiation of pregabalin were the main factors contributing to these findings.

DISCUSSION

Early initiation of pregabalin treatment after diagnosis in patients with refractory chronic PNP may result in substantial cost savings from a societal perspective in daily practice in Spain.

Epidural steroids: a comprehensive, evidence-based review

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are the most widely utilized pain management procedure in the world, their use supported by more than 45 placebo-controlled studies and dozens of systematic reviews. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, there continues to be considerable controversy surrounding their safety and efficacy. The results of clinical trials and review articles are heavily influenced by specialty, with those done by interventional pain physicians more likely to yield positive findings. Overall, more than half of controlled studies have demonstrated positive findings, suggesting a modest effect size lasting less than 3 months in well-selected individuals. Transforaminal injections are more likely to yield positive results than interlaminar or caudal injections, and subgroup analyses indicate a slightly greater likelihood for a positive response for lumbar herniated disk, compared with spinal stenosis or axial spinal pain. Other factors that may increase the likelihood of a positive outcome in clinical trials include the use of a nonepidural (eg, intramuscular) control group, higher volumes in the treatment group, and the use of depo-steroid. Serious complications are rare following ESIs, provided proper precautions are taken. Although there are no clinical trials comparing different numbers of injections, guidelines suggest that the number of injections should be tailored to individual response, rather than a set series. Most subgroup analyses of controlled studies show no difference in surgical rates between ESI and control patients; however, randomized studies conducted by spine surgeons, in surgically amenable patients with standardized operative criteria, indicate that in some patients the strategic use of ESI may prevent surgery.

Clinical and resource utilization patterns in patients with refractory neuropathic pain prescribed pregabalin for the first time in routine medical practice in primary care settings in Spain

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical and resource utilization patterns in patients with refractory neuropathic pain (NeP) who were prescribed pregabalin for the first time in routine medical practice in primary care settings.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of a 12-week prospective observational study including pregabalin naïve adult patients with refractory chronic NeP of at least 6-months duration. Self-reported pain intensity, disability, sleep disturbances, symptoms of anxiety and depression, disability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health care resource utilization, and corresponding costs were assessed in this post-hoc analysis.

RESULTS

One thousand three hundred fifty-four patients were enrolled in the study, and three treatment groups were identified: (1) 598 patients replaced prior pain treatments with pregabalin as monotherapy; (2) 589 added pregabalin to their existing pain treatments; and (3) 167 other pain treatments were prescribed according with physician routine medical practice. Statistically significant differences were reported at baseline for intensity of pain, patient disability, severity of depressive symptoms, and HRQoL (P < 0.01 in all cases). No statistically significant differences were reported among the three treatment groups for anxiety severity or sleep disturbances. Subjects who received add-on pregabalin had greater use of direct and indirect resources vs the other groups, resulting in significantly higher quarterly overall costs per patient: €2,397 (2,308), €2,470 (1,857), and €3,110 (2,496), respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that primary care physicians chose pregabalin as an option for treating refractory patients who tended to have much more severe NeP profiles, costing society more than when they chose other therapeutic strategies not including pregabalin.

Pessoas com dor e necessidades de intervenção: revisão sistemática da literatura

Objectivou-se determinar qual o impacto económico e social e as necessidades de intervenção por parte dos serviços de saúde, relativamente às pessoas com dor. Foi efectuada uma pesquisa na EBSCO (CINAHL, MEDLINE, British Nursing Index), utilizando-se o método de PI[C]O e seleccionados 19 artigos do total de 325 encontrados. A dor de tipo neuropática e a com localização músculo-esquelética foram identificadas como as maiores responsáveis pelos gastos em saúde. Como factores positivamente associados à relação custo-eficácia, encontrou-se: associação do regime terapêutico com estratégias não farmacológicas, intervenção de equipas multidisciplinares especializadas no controlo da dor, continuidade de cuidados na comunidade e uma linha telefónica de apoio permanente. Conclui-se que a dor causa significativa deterioração na qualidade de vida, com incalculável impacto no desempenho das actividades de vida diária.

Considerations for neuropathic pain conditions in life care planning

Significant progress has been made in assessing and managing neuropathic pain. Newer, more effective treatments with minimal side effects are available. Despite advances in treatments, neuropathic pain remains a multifaceted phenomenon that can be difficult to alleviate. Diagnosis, mechanisms of injury, and treatment recommendations are critical components of life care plans for patients with neuropathic pain. A clear understanding of the underlying issues and careful coordination with neurologists and other treatment providers are key to providing optimal life care plans. Understanding that pain treatments vary over time and by individual patient is integral to comprehensive life care planning.

Cost analysis of adding pregabalin or gabapentin to the management of community-treated patients with peripheral neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost of adding either pregabalin or gabapentin to the management of community-treated patients with peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted using medical records from a Spanish health care provider claims database. Patients receiving health care for PNP, above 18 years and for which either pregabalin or gabapentin was initiated between 2006 and 2008 were included. Economic evaluation included health care resource utilization costs and costs due to sick leave.

RESULTS

A total of 1163 patients with PNP were eligible for analysis: 764 were prescribed pregabalin and 399 gabapentin in addition to current pain therapy. Mean age was 59.2 years and 62.2% were female. Concomitant use of analgesics was higher in the gabapentin cohort (3.2 vs. 2.7; P = 0.003), mainly due to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (74.9% vs. 69.5%; P = 0.018) and opioids (27.7% vs. 17.9%; P = 0.031). Adjusted total costs per patient was lower in pregabalin-treated patients (€2514 vs. €3241; P = 0.003), due to less sick leave (€1067 vs. €1633; P = 0.018) and lower health care costs (€1447 vs. €1609; P = 0.004). The higher acquisition cost of pregabalin (€351 vs. €191; P < 0.001) was largely compensated with lower costs in medical visits, physiotherapy, hospital stays and concomitant analgesics.

CONCLUSIONS

In community-treated patients with PNP, total costs were considerably less for those patients initiated with pregabalin therapy than for those patients starting gabapentin add-on therapy. The relatively higher treatment acquisition cost of pregabalin was largely compensated by the overall lower costs for the other components of health care resources and sick leave, thus reducing the economic impact on the health care provider's budget and society.

An economic evaluation of pregabalin versus usual care in the management of community-treated patients with refractory painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy in primary care settings

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin versus usual care (UC) in the management of community-treated patients with refractory painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (pDPN) in primary care settings (PCS) in Spain.

METHODS

Data was extracted from a 12-week registry study assessing costs of neuropathic pain in Spain. Pregabalin-naïve outpatients treated with UC or newly prescribed pregabalin were selected for inclusion in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Effectiveness was expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gain. Perspectives of the Spanish National Health System (NHS) and society (2006) were applied for cost calculations. Results were expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Bootstrapping techniques (10,000 re-samples) were used to obtain the probabilistic ICER and the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients were included in the economic analysis. Compared with UC, pregabalin was associated with higher QALY gain in a period of 12-weeks; 0.0406±0.0343 versus 0.0285±0.0350 (p=0.167). Overall total costs (€1368±1229 vs. €1258±1474; p=0.587) and healthcare costs (€628±590 vs. €469±420; p=0.134) were similar for both pregabalin and UC, respectively. ICERs for pregabalin varied from €5302 (95% CI: dominant; €144,105) for total costs to €14,381 (dominant; €115,648) for healthcare costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that 79-84% of ICERs were below the threshold of €30,000/QALY.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that pregabalin may be cost-effective in the management of community-treated refractory outpatients, with pDPN when compared with usual care in the primary care setting in Spain. These findings may help policy makers when making health decision in the management of diabetes in the community.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of the effect of pregabalin versus usual care in the treatment of refractory neuropathic pain in routine medical practice in Spain

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin vs usual care (UC) in outpatients with refractory neuropathic pain (NeP), treated according to routine medical practice in primary care settings in Spain.

METHODS

Patients were extracted from a 12-week noninterventional prospective study conducted to ascertain the costs of NeP. Pairs of pregabalin-naïve patients receiving UC or pregabalin, matched by age, gender, pain intensity, and refractory to previous treatment, were selected in a 1:1 ratio. Refractory was considered a patient with actual pain (scoring >40 in a 100 mm in a pain visual analog scale) after receiving a course of a standard analgesic, at its recommended doses. Perspectives of the Spanish National Healthcare System and society were included in the analysis. Effectiveness was expressed as quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain. Results of the cost-effectiveness analysis were expressed as an incremental cost per QALY (ICER) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using bootstrapping techniques was also carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 160 pairs were extracted. Compared with UC, pregabalin was associated with significantly higher QALY gain; 0.0374 ± 0.0367 vs 0.0224 ± 0.0313 (P < 0.001). Despite drug acquisition costs being higher for pregabalin (€251 ± 125 vs €104 ± 121; P < 0.001), total and health care costs incurred for pregabalin were similar in both groups; €1,335 ± 1,302 vs €1,387 ± 1,489 (P = 0.587) and €529 ± 438 vs €560 ± 672 (P = 0.628), respectively, yielding a dominant ICER for both total and health care costs in the base case scenario; 95% confidence intervals, respectively, dominant to €17,268, and dominant to €6,508. Sensitivity analysis confirmed results of the basecase scenario.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that pregabalin may be cost-effective in the treatment of refractory NeP patients when compared with UC in routine medical practice in Spain.

Costs and health resources utilization following switching to pregabalin in individuals with gabapentin-refractory neuropathic pain: a post hoc analysis

PURPOSE

To analyze the changes in pain severity and associated costs resulting from resource utilization and reduced productivity in patients with gabapentin-refractory peripheral neuropathic pain who switched to pregabalin therapy in primary care settings in Spain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of a 12-week, multicentre, noninterventional cost-of-illness study. Patients were included in the study if they were over 18 years of age and had a diagnosis of chronic, treatment-refractory peripheral neuropathic pain. The analysis included all pregabalin-naïve patients who had previously shown an inadequate response to gabapentin and switched to pregabalin. Severity of pain before and after treatment with pregabalin, alone or as an add-on therapy, was assessed using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and its related visual analogue scale (VA). Healthcare resource utilization, productivity (including lost-workday equivalents [LWDE]), and related costs were assessed at baseline and after pregabalin treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 174 patients switched to pregabalin had significant and clinically relevant reductions in pain severity (mean [SD] change on SF-MPQ VA scale, -31.9 [22.1]; P < 0.05 vs. baseline; effect size, 1.87). Reduction in pain was similar with both pregabalin monotherapy and add-on therapy. Significant reductions in healthcare resource utilization (concomitant drug use [in pregabalin add-on group], ancillary tests, and unscheduled medical visits) were observed at the end of trial. Additionally, there were substantial improvements in productivity, including a reduction in the number of LWDE following pregabalin treatment (-18.9 [26.0]; P < 0.0001). These changes correlated with substantial reductions in both direct (-652.9 ± 1622.4 €; P < 0.0001) and indirect healthcare costs (-851.6 [1259.6] €; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of care in patients with gabapentin-refractory peripheral neuropathic pain appeared to be significantly reduced after switching to pregabalin treatment, alone or in combination with other analgesic drugs, in a real-life setting.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a new 8% capsaicin patch compared to existing therapies for postherpetic neuralgia

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of a new 8% capsaicin patch, compared to the current treatments for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), including tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), topical lidocaine patches, duloxetine, gabapentin, and pregabalin.

METHODS

A 1-year Markov model was constructed for PHN with monthly cycles, including dose titration and management of adverse events. The perspective of the analysis was from a payer perspective, managed-care organization. Clinical trials were used to determine the proportion of patients achieving at least a 30% improvement in PHN pain, the efficacy parameter. The outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY); second-order probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The effectiveness results indicated that 8% capsaicin patch and topical lidocaine patch were significantly more effective than the oral PHN products. TCAs were least costly and significantly less costly than duloxetine, pregabalin, topical lidocaine patch, 8% capsaicin patch, but not gabapentin. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the 8% capsaicin patch overlapped with the topical lidocaine patch and was within the accepted threshold of cost per QALY gained compared to TCAs, duloxetine, gabapentin, and pregablin. The frequency of the 8% capsaicin patch retreatment assumption significantly impacts its cost-effectiveness results. There are several limitations to this analysis. Since no head-to-head studies were identified, this model used inputs from multiple clinical trials. Also, a last observation carried forward process was assumed to have continued for the duration of the model. Additionally, the trials with duloxetine may have over-predicted its efficacy in PHN. Although a 30% improvement in pain is often an endpoint in clinical trials, some patients may require greater or less improvement in pain to be considered a clinical success.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness results demonstrated that 8% capsaicin and topical lidocaine patches had significantly higher effectiveness rates than the oral agents used to treat PHN. In addition, this cost-effectiveness analysis found that the 8% capsaicin patch was similar to topical lidocaine patch and within an accepted cost per QALY gained threshold compared to the oral products.

A cost-consequences analysis of the effect of pregabalin in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain in routine medical practice in primary care settings

Background

Neuropathic pain (NeP) is a common symptom of a group of a variety of conditions, including diabetic neuropathy, trigeminal neuralgia, or postherpetic neuralgia. Prevalence of NeP has been estimated to range between 5-7.5%, and produces up to 25% of pain clinics consultations. Due to its severity, chronic evolution, and associated co-morbidities, NeP has an important individual and social impact. The objective was to analyze the effect of pregabalin (PGB) on pain alleviation and longitudinal health and non-health resources utilization and derived costs in peripheral refractory NeP in routine medical practice in primary care settings (PCS) in Spain.

Methods

Subjects from PCS were older than 18 years, with peripheral NeP (diabetic neuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia or trigeminal neuralgia), refractory to at least one previous analgesic, and included in a prospective, real world, and 12-week two-visit cost-of-illness study. Measurement of resources utilization included both direct healthcare and indirect expenditures. Pain severity was measured by the Short Form-McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ).

Results

One-thousand-three-hundred-fifty-four PGB-naive patients [58.8% women, 59.5 (12.7) years old] were found eligible for this secondary analysis: 598 (44%) switched from previous therapy to PGB given in monotherapy (PGBm), 589 (44%) received PGB as add-on therapy (PGB add-on), and 167 (12%) patients changed previous treatments to others different than PGB (non-PGB). Reductions of pain severity were higher in both PGBm and PGB add-on groups (54% and 51%, respectively) than in non-PGB group (34%), p < 0.001. Incremental drug costs, particularly in PGB subgroups [€34.6 (80.3), €160.7 (123.9) and €154.5 (133.0), for non-PGB, PGBm and PGBadd-on, respectively (p < 0.001)], were off-set by higher significant reductions in all other components of health costs yielding to a greater total cost reductions: -€1,045.3 (1,989.6),-€1,312.9 (1,543.0), and -€1,565.5 (2,004.1), for the three groups respectively (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

In Spanish primary care settings, PGB given either add-on or in monotherapy in routine medical practice was associated with pain alleviation leading to significant longitudinal reductions in resource use and total costs during the 12-week period of the study compared with non-PGB-therapy of patients with chronic NeP of peripheral origin. The use of non-appropriate analgesic therapies for neuropathic pain in a portion of subjects in non-PGB group could explain partially such findings.

Effect of pregabalin in the treatment of refractory neck pain: cost and clinical evidence from medical practice in orthopedic surgery and rehabilitation clinics

BACKGROUND

The study aims to prospectively analyze the effect of adding pregabalin upon costs and consequences in the treatment of refractory neck pain under routine medical practice.

METHODS

A secondary analysis was carried out including patients over 18 years, with 6-month chronic neck pain refractory from a prospective, naturalistic, 12-week two-visit study. The analysis compared patients adding pregabalin to its therapy vs. usual care. Severity of pain, healthcare resources utilization, lost workday equivalents (LWDE) because of pain, and related cost-adjusted reductions were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 312 patients (65.3% women, age 54.2 [12.1] years), 78.2% receiving pregabalin, were analyzed. Adding pregabalin was associated with higher adjusted reduction in pain severity: -3.2 (1.8) points, 55.4% responders (≥50% baseline pain reduction) vs. -2.3 (2.0) and 38.2%, respectively; P<0.001, yielding a higher reduction in mean LWDE: 20.1 (23.1) vs. 8.2 (22.4); P=0.014, which produced significant reductions in the indirect components of cost: €1,041.0 (1,222.8) vs. €457.3 (1,132.1), P=0.028. The costs of pregabalin (€309.8 [193.2] vs. €26.4 [79.6], P<0.001) was offset by higher numerical reductions in the other components of costs, producing similar direct cost reductions in both groups at the end of the study: €66.8 (1,080.8) and €143.5 (1,922.4), respectively; P=0.295.

CONCLUSION

Compared with usual care, the addition of pregabalin to treat refractory neck pain seems to be associated with a higher reduction in pain severity and lost work-days equivalents, which in turn results in a greater reduction of the indirect components of cost while maintaining similar healthcare cost levels despite its higher price.

A cost-consequence analysis of pregabalin versus usual care in the symptomatic treatment of refractory low back pain: sub-analysis of observational trial data from orthopaedic surgery and rehabilitation clinics

BACKGROUND

low back pain is one of the most common reasons for outpatient consultation in both the primary-care and specialized-care settings. However, few studies have explored the effect of pregabalin in this context.

OBJECTIVE

to prospectively analyse the effect of adding pregabalin on costs and consequences in the treatment of refractory low back pain in routine medical practice.

METHODS

a secondary analysis was carried out in patients aged >or=18 years with a 6-month history of chronic refractory low back pain who had participated in a previous prospective, naturalistic, 12-week, two-visit study (RADIO study). The analysis compared patients receiving pregabalin with those receiving usual care. Severity of pain, healthcare resources utilization, lost workday equivalents due to pain, and related cost-adjusted reductions were assessed. The year of costing for all cost data reported in the study was 2007.

RESULTS

data from a total of 683 patients (49.5% women, mean age 55.0 years), 82.6% of whom were receiving pregabalin, were analysed. Pregabalin was associated with a higher covariable-adjusted reduction in severity of pain, i.e. mean (SD) -3.4 (2.0) compared with -2.0 (2.1) points with usual care on a 10-point neuropathic pain questionnaire (p < 0.001), and a 61.6% response rate (defined as >/=50% reduction in pain from baseline) compared with 37.3% with usual care (p < 0.001). This resulted in fewer lost workday equivalents in the pregabalin group versus usual care (27.8 vs 34.6, p = 0.002), which produced more significant adjusted reductions in indirect costs, i.e. mean (SD) -euro961.8 (euro1242.9) compared with -euro625.8 (euro1169.2) with usual care (p = 0.004). The cost of pregabalin, i.e. mean (SD) euro303.8 (euro175.8) compared with euro37.1 (euro97.0) for usual care (p < 0.001), was offset by larger reductions in the other cost components. While the adjusted total costs were substantially reduced in both groups, pregabalin-treated patients showed more significant reductions, i.e. mean (SD) -euro991.5 (euro1702.3) compared with -euro579.3 (euro2410.3) with usual care (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

compared with usual care, addition of pregabalin to existing therapy for refractory low back pain was associated with a larger reduction in pain severity and lost workday equivalents. The acquisition cost of pregabalin was offset by a higher reduction in the indirect components of cost, resulting in a significant decrease in total costs.

Patient-reported-outcomes in subjects with painful lumbar or cervical radiculopathy treated with pregabalin: evidence from medical practice in primary care settings

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of pregabalin in painful cervical or lumbosacral radiculopathy treated in Primary Care settings under routine clinical practice. An observational, prospective 12-week secondary analysis was carried-out. Male and female above 18 years, naïve to PGB, with refractory chronic pain secondary to cervical/lumbosacral radiculopathy were enrolled. SF-MPQ, Sheehan Disability Inventory, MOS Sleep Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the EQ-5D were administered. A total of 490 (34%) patients were prescribed PGB-monotherapy, 702 (48%) received PGB add-on, and 159 (11%) were administered non-PGB drugs. After 12 weeks, significant improvements in pain, associated symptoms of anxiety, depression and sleep disturbances, general health; and level of disability were observed in the three groups, being significantly greater in PGB groups. In routine medical practice, monotherapy or add-on pregabalin is associated with substantial pain alleviation and associated symptoms improvements in painful cervical or lumbosacral radiculopathy.

The need for knowledge translation in chronic pain

One in five Canadians suffers from some form of persistent or chronic pain. The impact on individual lives, families and friends, the health services sector and the economy is huge. Reliable evidence is available that the burden of persistent pain can be markedly reduced when available knowledge is applied. Bridging the quality chasm between chronic pain and the care process will require a unique confluence of opinion from all stakeholders committed within a focused community of practice to address the impact of pain. Various levels of success in this regard have been demonstrated when there is exchange, synthesis and ethically sound application of research findings within a complex set of interactions among researchers and knowledge users. It is now critical to accelerate the capture of the benefits of research for Canadians through improved health, more effective and responsive services and products, and a strengthened health care system to bring about health reform and health care reform across Canada as it pertains to the one in five Canadians living with chronic, disabling pain. The overarching outcome of such an initiative needs to be promoted to sustain a balanced portfolio of curiosity- and needs-based research, which along with existing knowledge, can be mobilized and applied for the benefit of Canadians, the health care system and the economy.

Trigeminal neuralgia treated with pregabalin in family medicine settings: its effect on pain alleviation and cost reduction

The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of pregabalin (PGB) on pain alleviation, use of health care and non-health care resources, and associated costs in patients with trigeminal neuralgia under usual clinical practice in primary care settings. Sixty-five PGB-naïve patients receiving PGB as monotherapy (n = 36, 55%) or combined with other drugs (n = 29, 45%) fulfill criteria for inclusion in a secondary analysis from a 12-week, multicenter, observational prospective study aimed to ascertain the cost of illness in subjects with neuropathic pain. Pain is evaluated using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Use of health care and non-health care resources and lost workdays equivalents (LWDEs) are also recorded. PGB significantly reduces pain scores, use of health care resources (ancillary tests and unscheduled medical visits), and number of LWDEs. Additional cost of PGB treatment (+euro 174 +/- 106) is broadly compensated for by a reduction in both health care costs (-euro 621 +/-1211, P < .001) and indirect costs (-euro 1210 +/- 1141, P < .001). It is concluded that PGB as monotherapy or combined with other drugs is effective in pain management in patients with trigeminal neuralgia and reduces the cost of illness.

Modelling the prevalence and cost of back pain with neuropathic components in the general population

BACKGROUND

Although there is increasing knowledge of the prevalence of neuropathic pain, little has been done to isolate the cost of neuropathic pain, especially with reference to the frequent complaint of back pain.

AIMS

To estimate the prevalence of neuropathic components in back pain and associated costs.

METHODS

We used available epidemiological data to model the prevalence of neuropathic back pain in the general adult population, combining three studies: painDETECT 1, painDETECT 2, and the German back pain research network (GBPRN) study, representing a total of 21,047 subjects. The painDETECT screening questionnaire was used in the former two surveys to assess neuropathic pain components. Costing data were obtained from 1718 participants in the GBPRN survey.

RESULTS

According to our model, approximately 4% of the general adult population experienced back pain with a neuropathic component. Owing to the greater severity of neuropathic pain, its costs were found to be disproportionately high: among patients with persistent back pain, typical costs associated with a person suffering neuropathic back pain were higher than those of an average back pain patient, and as much as 67% higher than those of a patient with nociceptive back pain only. Approximately, 16% of the total costs associated with back pain were attributable to pain with a neuropathic component.

CONCLUSIONS

Back pain with neuropathic components is likely to affect a relevant proportion of the general adult population and cause a disproportionately high share of back pain-related costs.

Neuropathic pain: quality-of-life impact, costs and cost effectiveness of therapy

A number of different diseases or injuries can damage the central or peripheral nervous system and produce neuropathic pain (NP), which seems to be more difficult to treat than many other types of chronic pain. As a group, patients with NP have greater medical co-morbidity burden than age- and sex-adjusted controls, which makes determining the humanistic and economic burden attributable to NP challenging. Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) is substantially impaired among patients with NP. Patients describe pain-related interference in multiple HR-QOL and functional domains, as well as reduced ability to work and reduced mobility due to their pain. In addition, the spouses of NP patients have been shown to experience adverse social consequences related to NP. In randomized controlled trials, several medications have been shown to improve various measures of HR-QOL. Changes in HR-QOL appear to be tightly linked to pain relief, but not to the development of adverse effects. However, in cross-sectional studies, many patients continue to have moderate or severe pain and markedly impaired HR-QOL, despite taking medications prescribed for NP. The quality of NP treatment appears to be poor, with few patients receiving recommended medications in efficacious dosages. The substantial costs to society of NP derive from direct medical costs, loss of the ability to work, loss of caregivers' ability to work and possibly greater need for institutionalization or other living assistance. No single study has measured all of these costs to society for chronic NP. The cost effectiveness of various interventions for the treatment or prevention of different types of NP has been assessed in several different studies. The most-studied diseases are post-herpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy, for which tricyclic antidepressants (both amitriptyline and desipramine) have been found to be either cost effective or dominant relative to other strategies. Increasing the use of cost-effective therapies such as tricyclic antidepressants for post-herpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy may improve the HR-QOL of patients and decrease societal costs. Head-to-head clinical trials comparing NP therapies are needed to help assess the relative clinical efficacy of treatments, ideally using HR-QOL and utility outcomes. The full costs to society of NP, including productivity loss costs, have not been determined for chronic NP. Improved relative efficacy, utility and cost estimates would facilitate future cost-effectiveness research in NP.

Contralateral high or a combination of high- and low-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation reduces mechanical allodynia and alters dorsal horn neurotransmitter content in neuropathic rats

The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of 3 different application strategies for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on neuropathy-induced allodynia and dorsal horn neurotransmitter content. Rats were treated with high-frequency, low-frequency, or a combination of high and low-frequency stimulation. TENS was delivered through self-adhesive electrodes daily for 1 hour to rats with a right-sided chronic constriction injury (CCI). Stimulation was delivered to skin or acupuncture points on the left and mechanical and thermal pain thresholds were assessed in the right hind paw. Neurotransmitter content was assessed bilaterally in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. Daily, high-frequency or a combination of high- and low-frequency TENS reduced mechanical (P < .001), but not thermal allodynia in the right hind paw when compared with untreated CCI rats. Daily high frequency TENS elevated the dorsal horn synaptosomal content of GABA bilaterally (P < .014) and a combination of high- and low-frequency TENS elevated the dorsal horn content of aspartate (P < .001), glutamate (P < .001) and glycine (P < .001) bilaterally over that seen in untreated CCI rats. The present findings support a contralateral approach to the application of TENS and suggest that distinct strategies for TENS application may differentially alter neurotransmission in the central nervous system.

PERSPECTIVE

Because CCI rats are reminiscent of humans with neuropathy, daily high or a combination of high- and low-frequency TENS may reduce mechanical allodynia in humans with neuropathic pain. Because the 2 intervention strategies produce distinctive alterations in spinal cord neurotransmitter content, each may represent a distinctive option for treatment.