4.7 Article

The cost-effectiveness of deep brain stimulation in combination with best medical therapy, versus best medical therapy alone, in advanced Parkinson's disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 261, Issue 1, Pages 106-116

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-013-7148-z

Keywords

Best medical treatment; Cost-effectiveness; Deep brain stimulation; Parkinson's disease; Quality of life

Funding

  1. Medtronic International

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a complex progressive movement disorder leading to motor and non-motor symptoms that become increasingly debilitating as the disease advances, considerably reducing quality of life. Advanced treatment options include deep brain stimulation (DBS). While clinical effectiveness of DBS has been demonstrated in a number of randomised controlled trials (RCT), evidence on cost-effectiveness is limited. The cost-effectiveness of DBS combined with BMT, versus BMT alone, was evaluated from a UK payer perspective. Individual patient-level data on the effect of DBS on PD symptom progression from a large 6-month RCT were used to develop a Markov model representing clinical progression and capture treatment effect and costs. A 5-year time horizon was used, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and uncertainty assessed in deterministic sensitivity analyses. Total discounted costs in the DBS and BMT groups over 5 years were 68,970 pound and 48,243 pound, respectively, with QALYs of 2.21 and 1.21, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 20,678 pound per QALY gained. Utility weights in each health state and costs of on-going medication appear to be the key drivers of uncertainty in the model. The results suggest that DBS is a cost-effective intervention in patients with advanced PD who are eligible for surgery, providing good value for money to health care payers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available