Optimizing Healthcare Expenditure for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Italy: The Value of Battery Longevity Improvement and a Direct-to-Implant Approach.

IF 2.3 Q2 ECONOMICS
Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-05-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.36469/001c.116177
Federica Tito, Gianfranco Sindaco, Simon Eggington, Elisa Tacconi, Francesca Borghetti, Mara Corbo, Gilberto Pari
{"title":"Optimizing Healthcare Expenditure for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Italy: The Value of Battery Longevity Improvement and a Direct-to-Implant Approach.","authors":"Federica Tito, Gianfranco Sindaco, Simon Eggington, Elisa Tacconi, Francesca Borghetti, Mara Corbo, Gilberto Pari","doi":"10.36469/001c.116177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a treatment for chronic intractable pain powered by an implantable pulse generator that may be rechargeable or not rechargeable (NR). It is performed in 2 stages (a trialing phase followed by permanent device implantation) and necessitates 2 hospitalizations, which may increase infection risk. <b>Objective:</b> This analysis explores the cost impact of improvements in battery longevity and the adoption of 1-step (direct-to-implant [DTI]) SCS implantation. <b>Methods:</b> Since 2019, 3 leading NR-SCS devices have been launched: Device A (2019), Device B (2020), and Device C (2021). The battery longevity of the newest Device C was estimated at comparable stimulation settings for Devices A and B. A Markov model simulated individual patient pathways across 2 scenarios: Device A vs Device C and Device B vs Device C (both with the DTI approach and 2-step approach). Costs considered were the initial device implantation procedure, device replacements, and serious adverse event (SAE) management. Italian diagnosis-related group (DRG) tariffs were applied for costs, and a 15-year time horizon was used. <b>Results:</b> Over 15 years, using a DTI approach, the undiscounted total costs for Device A vs Device C were €26 860 and €22 633, respectively, and €25 111 and €22 399 for Device B vs Device C, respectively. Compared with Devices A and B, Device C offered savings of €4227 and €2712, respectively; similar savings were predicted with a 2-step implant approach. <b>Discussion:</b> The battery longevity of NR-SCS devices directly impacts long-term costs to a payer. The longer the device lasts, the lower mean total cumulative costs the patient will have, especially with regard to device replacement costs. With novel devices and specific programming settings, the lifetime cost per patient to a payer can be decreased without compromising the patient's safety and positive clinical outcome. <b>Conclusions:</b> Extended SCS battery longevity can translate into tangible cost savings for payers. The DTI approach for SCS supports National Healthcare System cost efficiencies and offers the additional benefits of optimizing operating room time while having only one recovery period for the patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":16012,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","volume":"11 1","pages":"149-156"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11139019/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.116177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a treatment for chronic intractable pain powered by an implantable pulse generator that may be rechargeable or not rechargeable (NR). It is performed in 2 stages (a trialing phase followed by permanent device implantation) and necessitates 2 hospitalizations, which may increase infection risk. Objective: This analysis explores the cost impact of improvements in battery longevity and the adoption of 1-step (direct-to-implant [DTI]) SCS implantation. Methods: Since 2019, 3 leading NR-SCS devices have been launched: Device A (2019), Device B (2020), and Device C (2021). The battery longevity of the newest Device C was estimated at comparable stimulation settings for Devices A and B. A Markov model simulated individual patient pathways across 2 scenarios: Device A vs Device C and Device B vs Device C (both with the DTI approach and 2-step approach). Costs considered were the initial device implantation procedure, device replacements, and serious adverse event (SAE) management. Italian diagnosis-related group (DRG) tariffs were applied for costs, and a 15-year time horizon was used. Results: Over 15 years, using a DTI approach, the undiscounted total costs for Device A vs Device C were €26 860 and €22 633, respectively, and €25 111 and €22 399 for Device B vs Device C, respectively. Compared with Devices A and B, Device C offered savings of €4227 and €2712, respectively; similar savings were predicted with a 2-step implant approach. Discussion: The battery longevity of NR-SCS devices directly impacts long-term costs to a payer. The longer the device lasts, the lower mean total cumulative costs the patient will have, especially with regard to device replacement costs. With novel devices and specific programming settings, the lifetime cost per patient to a payer can be decreased without compromising the patient's safety and positive clinical outcome. Conclusions: Extended SCS battery longevity can translate into tangible cost savings for payers. The DTI approach for SCS supports National Healthcare System cost efficiencies and offers the additional benefits of optimizing operating room time while having only one recovery period for the patient.

优化意大利脊髓刺激医疗支出:提高电池寿命和直接植入方法的价值。
背景:脊髓刺激(SCS)是一种治疗慢性顽固性疼痛的方法,由可充电或不可充电(NR)的植入式脉冲发生器驱动。它分两个阶段进行(试验阶段和永久性装置植入阶段),需要两次住院,这可能会增加感染风险。目标:本分析探讨了提高电池寿命和采用一步式(直接植入 [DTI])SCS 植入对成本的影响。方法:自 2019 年以来,已推出 3 款领先的 NR-SCS 设备:设备 A(2019 年)、设备 B(2020 年)和设备 C(2021 年)。马尔可夫模型模拟了两种情况下患者的个体路径:设备 A 与设备 C,设备 B 与设备 C(均采用 DTI 方法和两步法)。考虑的成本包括初始设备植入程序、设备更换和严重不良事件(SAE)管理。成本采用意大利诊断相关组 (DRG) 费率,时间跨度为 15 年。结果:采用 DTI 方法,15 年内,设备 A 与设备 C 的未贴现总成本分别为 26 860 欧元和 22 633 欧元,设备 B 与设备 C 的未贴现总成本分别为 25 111 欧元和 22 399 欧元。与设备 A 和设备 B 相比,设备 C 可分别节省 4227 欧元和 2712 欧元;预计两步植入法也能节省类似的费用。讨论NR-SCS 设备的电池寿命直接影响支付方的长期成本。设备寿命越长,患者的平均累积总费用就越低,尤其是设备更换费用。通过新型设备和特定的编程设置,可以在不影响患者安全和积极临床结果的前提下降低支付方为每位患者支付的终生费用。结论:延长 SCS 电池寿命可以为付款人节省实际成本。用于 SCS 的 DTI 方法有助于提高国家医疗保健系统的成本效率,还能优化手术室时间,同时为患者提供一个恢复期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信