The cost-effectiveness of physical therapy versus laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: A Markov decision analysis.

IF 4.9 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Prashant V Rajan, Joshua Eisenberg, Stephen Selverian, Richard Wawrose, Sangwook Tim Yoon
{"title":"The cost-effectiveness of physical therapy versus laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: A Markov decision analysis.","authors":"Prashant V Rajan, Joshua Eisenberg, Stephen Selverian, Richard Wawrose, Sangwook Tim Yoon","doi":"10.1016/j.spinee.2025.02.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background context: </strong>Physical therapy is often utilized as a nonoperative modality for the treatment of lumbar stenosis, oftentimes a prerequisite for insurance approval for surgery.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The goal of our study was to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of physical therapy as compared to a hospital-based or inpatient single-level lumbar laminectomy from the outset for lumbar stenosis.</p><p><strong>Study design/setting: </strong>Cost-effectiveness analysis, Markov model simulation PATIENT SAMPLE: We developed a Markov model to analyze the baseline case: a 55-year-old patient with symptomatic lumbar stenosis undergoing physical therapy versus lumbar laminectomy from outset.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Model outcome measures were total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs, organized into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). ICERs were evaluated against willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP) of $50,000 and $100,000.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Transition probabilities were derived from the literature. Univariate and bivariate sensitivity analyses were performed as well as a probabilistic analysis varying several sensitive variables over distributions through 10,000 different simulations. Both health-care payer and societal perspectives were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From health-care payer perspective, laminectomy from outset produced higher QALYs (12.11 vs 11.87) at lower total cost ($15,735 vs $16,877) and was thus the dominant treatment. From societal perspective, physical therapy generated lower costs ($32,007) compared to laminectomy ($32,368). With an ICER of $1,485 per QALY for laminectomy which was below the WTP thresholds. The results were not sensitive to the procedural costs of laminectomy and physical therapy. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, virtually all iterations found laminectomy from outset to be cost-effective over physical therapy across all WTP thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our cost-effectiveness analysis showed laminectomy to be the preferred treatment strategy from the outset for symptomatic lumbar stenosis from both healthcare payer and societal perspectives. These findings highlight the need for further study into the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of physical therapy to validate these model-based findings and explore ways to optimize the management of lumbar stenosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":49484,"journal":{"name":"Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2025.02.008","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background context: Physical therapy is often utilized as a nonoperative modality for the treatment of lumbar stenosis, oftentimes a prerequisite for insurance approval for surgery.

Purpose: The goal of our study was to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of physical therapy as compared to a hospital-based or inpatient single-level lumbar laminectomy from the outset for lumbar stenosis.

Study design/setting: Cost-effectiveness analysis, Markov model simulation PATIENT SAMPLE: We developed a Markov model to analyze the baseline case: a 55-year-old patient with symptomatic lumbar stenosis undergoing physical therapy versus lumbar laminectomy from outset.

Outcome measures: Model outcome measures were total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs, organized into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). ICERs were evaluated against willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP) of $50,000 and $100,000.

Methods: Transition probabilities were derived from the literature. Univariate and bivariate sensitivity analyses were performed as well as a probabilistic analysis varying several sensitive variables over distributions through 10,000 different simulations. Both health-care payer and societal perspectives were included.

Results: From health-care payer perspective, laminectomy from outset produced higher QALYs (12.11 vs 11.87) at lower total cost ($15,735 vs $16,877) and was thus the dominant treatment. From societal perspective, physical therapy generated lower costs ($32,007) compared to laminectomy ($32,368). With an ICER of $1,485 per QALY for laminectomy which was below the WTP thresholds. The results were not sensitive to the procedural costs of laminectomy and physical therapy. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, virtually all iterations found laminectomy from outset to be cost-effective over physical therapy across all WTP thresholds.

Conclusions: Our cost-effectiveness analysis showed laminectomy to be the preferred treatment strategy from the outset for symptomatic lumbar stenosis from both healthcare payer and societal perspectives. These findings highlight the need for further study into the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of physical therapy to validate these model-based findings and explore ways to optimize the management of lumbar stenosis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Spine Journal
Spine Journal 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
680
审稿时长
13.1 weeks
期刊介绍: The Spine Journal, the official journal of the North American Spine Society, is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original, peer-reviewed articles on research and treatment related to the spine and spine care, including basic science and clinical investigations. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to The Spine Journal have not been published, and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. The Spine Journal also publishes major reviews of specific topics by acknowledged authorities, technical notes, teaching editorials, and other special features, Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.
×
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