4.3 Article

Hylan G-F 20 Has Better Pain Relief and Cost-effectiveness than Sodium Hyaluronate in Treating Early Osteoarthritic Knees in Taiwan

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE FORMOSAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
卷 108, 期 8, 页码 663-672

出版社

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/S0929-6646(09)60387-9

关键词

cost-effectiveness; hyaluronic acid; hylan G-F 20; osteoarthritis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Purpose: Intra-articular injection of hyaluronan (hyaluronic acid; HA) products is available to treat early osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee in Taiwan. We tested whether HA products with different molecular weights have significantly different effects on clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Methods: Thirty-seven patients with mild to moderate OA of both knees underwent five weekly intra-articular injections of sodium hyaluronate (Artz(R)) in one knee and three weekly intra-articular injections of chemically cross-linked Hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc(R)) in the other. Visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lequesne's index, and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee scores were compared initially and at the last injection, and at 8, 12, 16, 20, and 26 weeks after the first injection. Results: VAS, WOMAC, WOMAC-A1 (pain when walking on a flat surface) scores before week 16, HSS scores before week 12, and Lequesne's index scores except at week 26 all showed that HA significantly improved the scores time-dependently. In VAS scores, Synvisc(R) showed better improvement before week 20, while this effect appeared at week 12 for the WOMAC-A1 scores. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the Taiwan National Health Insurance Program, of the patient, and both of these was lower for Synvisc(R), which also reduced the number of additional hospital visits for injections by two. Conclusion: Synvisc(R) possesses better symptom-modifying ability and cost-utility in treating early OA of the knee in Taiwan. [J Formos Med Assoc 2009;108(8):663-672]

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据