Retrospective analysis of the financial break-even point for intrathecal morphine pump use in Korea

Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility Analyses in Thailand of Continuous Intrathecal Morphine Infusion Compared with Conventional Therapy in Cancer Pain: A 10-year Multicenter Retrospective Study

Background

Because of the high initial cost of intrathecal drug delivery (ITDD) therapy, this study investigated the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ITDD therapy in refractory cancer pain management in Thailand over the past 10 years.

Methods

The retrospective study was conducted in patients with cancer pain who underwent ITDD therapy from January 2011 to 2021 at three university hospitals. Clinical outcomes included the numerical rating scale (NRS), Palliative Performance Scale, and the EQ-5D. The direct medical and nonmedical as well as indirect costs were also recorded. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed comparing ITDD therapy with conventional therapy (extrapolated from costs of the same patient before ITDD therapy) from a societally oriented economic evaluation.

Results

Twenty patients (F:M: 10:10) aged 60 ± 15 years who underwent implantation of an intrathecal percutaneous port (IT port; n = 15) or programmable intrathecal pump (IT pump; n = 5) were included. The median survival time was 78 (interquartile range = 121-54) days after ITDD therapy. At 2-month follow-up, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)/pain reduction of an IT port (US$2065.36 (CA$2829.54)/2-point NRS reduction/lifetime) was lower than for patients with an IT pump (US$5479.26 (CA$7506.58)/2-point NRS reduction/lifetime) compared with continued conventional therapy. The ICER/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained for an IT port compared with conventional treatment was US$93,999.31(CA$128,799.06)/QALY gained, which is above the cost-effectiveness threshold for Thailand.

Conclusion

The cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of IT port therapy for cancer pain was high relative to the cost of living in Thailand, above the cost-effectiveness threshold. Prospective cost analysis studies enrolling more patients with diverse cancers that investigate the benefit of early ITDD therapy with devices over a range of prices are warranted.

Myth and Truth in Opioid Consumption with Intrathecal Morphine Pump Implantation in Chronic Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Claims Database in South Korea

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the opioid consumption and the healthcare resource utilization in patients with the intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) therapy and the comprehensive medical management (CMM) alone.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with a customized claims database.

SETTING

In a university-based hospital.

SUBJECTS

Patients with complex regional pain syndrome, post-laminectomy syndrome, and fibromyalgia.

METHODS

Using propensity score matching (1:3), we selected patients with morphine infusion through IDDS (IDDS group) and CMM alone (CMM group). The primary endpoints were comparisons of average morphine equivalents daily dosages (MEDD, mg/day) for 6 and 12 months from an index date. The number of emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations and the total medical expenditures were compared as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 82 patients (N = 23 in the IDDS group and N = 59 in the CMM group) were analyzed. Although a 6-month average MEDD did not reach statistical significance, a 12-month average MEDD was significantly decreased in the IDDS group compared to the CMM group (53.2 ± 46.3 vs 123.9 ± 176.4, respectively; P = 0.008). ER visits were more frequent in the IDDS group than the CMM group at baseline (5.4 vs 0.5, respectively; P = .002), which was maintained for 12 months (P < 0.001). Otherwise, the number of hospitalization and the medical expenditures for pain management were not different between the groups for 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined IDDS therapy had some benefits in reducing opioid consumption for 1-year follow-up compared to the CMM alone in chronic noncancer pain patients.

Intrathecal Morphine Infusion Therapy via a Percutaneous Port for Refractory Cancer Pain in China: An Efficacy, Safety and Cost Utilization Analysis

Purpose

Intrathecal morphine infusion therapy via a percutaneous port (IMITPP) has been used widely for its relatively low initial cost. However, there is scarce knowledge about IMITPP. In this study, we sought to evaluate efficacy, complications, and the interval required to achieve the cost equivalence of IMITPP in patients with refractory cancer pain in China.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on cancer patients who had received IMITPP at our hospital between April 2017 and April 2019. Data from the numeric pain rating scale and Karnofsky performance scores, and complications and costs related to IMITPP were collected from medical records. Daily analgesic costs before and after IMITPP were calculated based on the doses of opioids on admission and at discharge, respectively. The doses of systemic opioids before IMITPP were stratified into very high doses [VHD, oral morphine equivalent dose (OMED) >599 mg/day], high doses (HD, 300 mg/day ≤ OMED ≤ 599 mg/day), and regular doses (RD, OMED < 300 mg/day).

Results

Intrathecal morphine infusion therapy via a percutaneous port provided significant pain relief, but impaired activities of daily living in patients with refractory cancer pain. The commonly reported complications included nausea/vomiting and urinary retention, most of which were managed with symptomatic therapies. The median interval required to achieve cost equivalence was 11.44 months. The median intervals of VHD group and HD group were significantly shorter than that of RD group.

Conclusion

Intrathecal morphine infusion therapy via a percutaneous port provided effective cancer pain management without causing serious complications. Patients with higher doses of systemic opioids would economically benefit from IMITPP in a shorter time.