Custo-Efetividade de Diferentes Tratamentos Minimamente Invasivos Para Disfunção Temporomandibular de Origem Articular sob a Perspectiva do Sistema Público de Saúde Brasileiro

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness (CE) of minimally invasive interventions for pain associated with articular temporomandibular dysfunction from the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS) perspective.

Methods

This is a CE study with a 1-year time horizon. Effectiveness data were extracted from a network meta-analysis, and 2 treatments with moderate levels of evidence certainty were evaluated: arthrocentesis (ARTRO) plus intra-articular corticosteroid (CO) injection and ARTRO plus intra-articular injection of sodium hyaluronate (SH). For CE analysis, the costs of 2 types of SH (low and high molecular weight) and 4 COs (betamethasone [B], dexamethasone acetate [D], methylprednisolone sodium succinate [M], or triamcinolone hexacetonide [T]) were considered. Modeling was conducted using TreeAge Pro Healthcare software, with the construction of a decision tree representing a hypothetical cohort of adults with articular temporomandibular dysfunction. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. In addition, an acceptability curve was developed.

Results

The total costs per joint for ARTRO plus low- and high-molecular-weight SH and ARTRO plus COs B, D, M, and T were, respectively, R$583.32, R$763.85, R$164.39, R$133.93, R$138.57, and R$159.86. ARTRO plus dexamethasone acetate was considered cost-effective, with lower cost and higher net monetary benefit than other technologies. In all sensitivity analysis scenarios, it remained cost-effective. It also showed greater acceptability.

Conclusion

ARTRO plus dexamethasone acetate was considered the cost-effective technology, exhibiting higher net monetary benefit and higher acceptability from the SUS perspective.