Доступ предоставлен для: Guest
Портал Begell Электронная Бибилиотека e-Книги Журналы Справочники и Сборники статей Коллекции
Journal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants
SJR: 0.133 SNIP: 0.491 CiteScore™: 0.89

ISSN Печать: 1050-6934
ISSN Онлайн: 1940-4379

Выпуски:
Том 29, 2019 Том 28, 2018 Том 27, 2017 Том 26, 2016 Том 25, 2015 Том 24, 2014 Том 23, 2013 Том 22, 2012 Том 21, 2011 Том 20, 2010 Том 19, 2009 Том 18, 2008 Том 17, 2007 Том 16, 2006 Том 15, 2005 Том 14, 2004 Том 13, 2003 Том 12, 2002 Том 11, 2001 Том 10, 2000

Journal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants

DOI: 10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2014011685
pages 173-183

Cost Effectiveness of a Novel 10 kHz High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation System in Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS)

Lieven Annemans
Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Jean-Pierre Van Buyten
Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, AZ Nikolaas, St. Niklaas, Belgium
Thomas Smith
The Pain Management and Neuromodulation Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Adnan Al-Kaisy
The Pain Management and Neuromodulation Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Краткое описание

Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective method of relieving chronic intractable pain, and one of its key indications is failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of 10 kHz high-frequency SCS (HF10 SCS) compared to conventional medical management (CMM), reoperation, and traditional nonrechargeable (TNR-SCS) and rechargeable SCS (TR-SCS). Methods: A health economic model of SCS in the United Kingdom was reproduced in the perspective of the health care system to simulate costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) over 15 years. In the model, both a decision tree and the Markov model were used to describe the health outcomes of the evaluated therapies. Results: HF10 SCS therapy showed a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £3,153 per QALY gained as compared to CMM and established dominance (less costly, more QALYs) compared to TNR-SCS (£8,802 per QALY vs. CMM) and TR-SCS (£5,101 per QALY vs. CMM). Conclusion: This first analysis of the cost effectiveness of HF10 SCS suggests that it is more cost effective and provides a greater number of QALYs than both TNR-SCS and TR-SCS.