4.4 Article

Cost-Effectiveness of Tramadol and Oxycodone in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

期刊

ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH
卷 69, 期 2, 页码 234-242

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/acr.22916

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH/National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases [R01-AR-064320, K24-AR-057827]
  2. Pfizer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incorporating tramadol or oxycodone into knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. MethodsWe used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model to evaluate long-term clinical and economic outcomes of knee OA patients with a mean age of 60 years with persistent pain despite conservative treatment. We evaluated 3 strategies: opioid-sparing (OS), tramadol (T), and tramadol followed by oxycodone (T+O). We obtained estimates of pain reduction and toxicity from published literature and annual costs for tramadol ($600) and oxycodone ($2,300) from Red Book Online. Based on published data, in the base case, we assumed a 10% reduction in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) effectiveness in opioid-based strategies. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and were discounted at 3% per year. ResultsIn the base case, T and T+O strategies delayed TKA by 7 and 9 years, respectively, and led to reduction in TKA utilization by 4% and 10%, respectively. Both opioid-based strategies increased cost and decreased QALYs compared to the OS strategy. Tramadol's ICER was highly sensitive to its effect on TKA outcomes. Reduction in TKA effectiveness by 5% (compared to base case 10%) resulted in an ICER for the T strategy of $110,600 per QALY; with no reduction in TKA effectiveness, the ICER was $26,900 per QALY. When TKA was not considered a treatment option, the ICER for T was $39,600 per QALY. ConclusionOpioids do not appear to be cost-effective in OA patients without comorbidities, principally because of their negative impact on pain relief after TKA. The influence of opioids on TKA outcomes should be a research priority.

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

4.4
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