Selective dorsal rhizotomy; evidence on cost-effectiveness from England.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 09 08 2019
accepted: 15 07 2020
entrez: 11 8 2020
pubmed: 11 8 2020
medline: 7 10 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) has gained interest as an intervention to reduce spasticity and pain, and improve quality of life and mobility in children with cerebral palsy mainly affecting the legs (diplegia). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of SDR in England. Cost-effectiveness was quantified with respect to Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-66) and the pain dimension of the Cerebral Palsy Quality of Life questionnaire for Children (CPQOL-Child). Data on outcomes following SDR over two years were drawn from a national evaluation in England which included 137 children, mean age 6.6 years at surgery. The incremental impact of SDR on GMFM-66 was determined through comparison with data from a historic Canadian cohort not undergoing SDR. Another single centre provided data on hospital care over ten years for 15 children undergoing SDR at a mean age of 7.0 years, and a comparable cohort managed without SDR. The incremental impact of SDR on pain was determined using a before and after comparison using data from the national evaluation. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Incremental costs of SDR were determined as the difference in costs over 5 years for the patients undergoing SDR and those managed without SDR. Uncertainty was quantified using bootstrapping and reported as the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. In the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for SDR are £1,382 and £903 with respect to a unit improvement in GMFM-66 and the pain dimension of CPQOL-Child, respectively. Inclusion of data to 10 years indicates SDR is cheaper than management without SDR. Incremental costs and ICERs for SDR rose in sensitivity analysis applying an alternative regression model to cost data. Data on outcomes from a large observational study of SDR and long-term cost data on children who did and did not receive SDR indicates SDR is cost-effective.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32776949
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236783
pii: PONE-D-19-22434
pmc: PMC7416930
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0236783

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

CV has received payments or expenses for acting as the clinical chair for NHS England Commissioning through Evaluation for SDR. MP has received personal fees from Merck. The other authors declare no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Références

Stat Med. 2011 Feb 20;30(4):377-99
pubmed: 21225900
J Pediatr Orthop. 1984 Jan;4(1):52-4
pubmed: 6693569
Dev Med Child Neurol Suppl. 2007 Feb;109:8-14
pubmed: 17370477
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002 Sep;44(9):633-40
pubmed: 12227618
J Rehabil Med. 2018 Jan 10;50(1):22-29
pubmed: 28949368
J Neurosurg. 2004 Aug;101(1 Suppl):59-63
pubmed: 16206973
J Child Neurol. 1996 Nov;11 Suppl 1:S29-35
pubmed: 8959459
Childs Nerv Syst. 2008 Feb;24(2):239-43
pubmed: 17805547
Arch Dis Child. 2015 Aug;100(8):798-802
pubmed: 25670404
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013 Jul;55(7):610-6
pubmed: 23557106
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2004 Jul;46(7):491-9
pubmed: 15230464
Neurosurg Focus. 2006 Aug 15;21(2):e7
pubmed: 16918228
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011 Jun;53(6):490-8
pubmed: 21518341
Eur J Neurol. 2001 Nov;8 Suppl 5:194-202
pubmed: 11851748
Pediatr Neurosurg. 1995;22(5):255-64; discussion 265
pubmed: 7547458
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2017 Nov;59(11):1196-1203
pubmed: 28786493
J Child Neurol. 2007 Jan;22(1):49-59
pubmed: 17608306
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2019 Jul;3(7):455-462
pubmed: 31047843
Lancet. 2004 May 15;363(9421):1619-31
pubmed: 15145637
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007 Jan;49(1):49-55
pubmed: 17209977
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 Jul-Aug;23(6):546-52
pubmed: 19228818
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Jan;48(1):64-73
pubmed: 16359597
S Afr Med J. 1982 Jul 24;62(4):119-24
pubmed: 7089801
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2013 Aug;12(2):142-50
pubmed: 23713680
J Neurosurg. 2002 Jun;96(6):1052-7
pubmed: 12066906
J Physiother. 2017 Jul;63(3):187
pubmed: 28633883
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2009 Apr;51(4):295-302
pubmed: 19391185

Auteurs

Mark Pennington (M)

Kings Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.
King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Jennifer Summers (J)

King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Bola Coker (B)

King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Saskia Eddy (S)

King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Muralikrishnan R Kartha (MR)

Kings Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.
King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Karen Edwards (K)

The Robert Jones & Agnes Hunt Hospital, Oswestry, United Kingdom.

Robert Freeman (R)

The Robert Jones & Agnes Hunt Hospital, Oswestry, United Kingdom.

John Goodden (J)

Department of Neurosurgery, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Helen Powell (H)

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Christopher Verity (C)

Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Janet L Peacock (JL)

King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH