Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Pain Physician ; 26(1): 69-79, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36791296

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for chronic refractory pain. The evidence of pain reduction, improvement of function, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness are strong in developed countries. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of economic studies of SCS in the context of low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of additional SCS to conventional management (CMM) in patients with chronic refractory pain in Thailand. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: The pain clinic at Siriraj Hospital, a tertiary care center in Thailand. METHODS: This study recruited patients undergoing SCS implants due to refractory pain to CMM from varieties of conditions and followed up to 36 months. The clinical outcomes, quality of life, and costs of treatment were collected before and after SCS implantation. A decision tree and Markov model were developed to estimate the total lifetime costs and health benefits of SCS using a societal perspective. The results were presented as an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) in 2021 Thai Baht (THB) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) in 2021 THB per numeric rating pain score (NRS) reduction. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients who underwent SCS implantation reported pain intensity and increased utility at every point in time. Compared to pre-implantation, the QALY gained in both rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS was 2.13 QALYs. The economic analysis showed the ICUR in the rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS + CMM group was 660,106.96, and 620,120.59 THB/QALY gained, respectively, which was higher than Thais' willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold at 160,000 THB/QALY gained. Pain score reduction was 2.49/10 at the 3-year point, and the ICER was 496,932.08 and 337,341.77 THB/NRS reduction for rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS, respectively. LIMITATIONS: As this is a single-center prospective cohort study, the results might be subject to selection bias and may not truly represent all patients from a developing country. The cost-effectiveness results should also be carefully interpreted for generalizability. CONCLUSION: Spinal cord stimulation is effective in pain control and improves the quality of life for patients with chronic refractory pain. However, the ICUR of SCS is above the WTP, leading to the interpretation that SCS is still not a cost-effective treatment in the current context in Thailand.


Subject(s)
Chronic Pain , Pain, Intractable , Spinal Cord Stimulation , Humans , Spinal Cord Stimulation/methods , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , Quality of Life , Prospective Studies , Developing Countries , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Chronic Pain/therapy , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
2.
Braz J Anesthesiol ; 71(4): 345-351, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34229860

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain from transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (TRUS-P) biopsy under sedation is often mild. Benefit of opioids used during sedation is controversial. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare numeric rating scale (NRS) score at 30 minutes after TRUS-P biopsy between patients receiving propofol alone or with fentanyl. METHODS: We randomly allocated 124 patients undergoing TRUS-P biopsy to receive either fentanyl 0.5 mcg.kg-1 (Group F) or normal saline (Group C). Both groups received titrated propofol sedation via Target-controlled infusion (TCI) with Schneider model until the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scale 0-1 was achieved. Hemodynamic variables, patient movement, postoperative pain score, patient and surgeon satisfaction score were recorded. RESULTS: Overall, most patients (97.5%) had no to mild pain. Group F had significantly lower median NRS score at 30 minutes compared to Group C (0 [0, 0] vs. 0 [0, 0.25], p = 0.039). More patients in Group C experienced pain (90% vs. 75.8%, p =  0.038). Perioperative hypotension was higher in group F (81.7%) compared to Group C (61.3%) (p =  0.013). Thirty-five (56.5%) patients in Group F and 25 (42.7%) patients in Group C had movement during the procedure (p = 0.240). Surgeon's satisfaction score was higher in Group F (10 [9, 10]) than Group C (9 [9, 10]) (p =  0.037). CONCLUSION: Combining low dose fentanyl with TCI propofol sedation may provide additional benefit on postoperative pain after TRUS-P biopsy, but results in perioperative hypotension. Fentanyl may attenuate patient movement during the procedure, which leads to greater surgeon's satisfaction.


Subject(s)
Propofol , Biopsy , Conscious Sedation , Fentanyl , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Male , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Prostate , Ultrasonography, Interventional
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...