Cost-Effectiveness and Cost–Utility Analyses in Thailand of Continuous Intrathecal Morphine Infusion Compared with Conventional Therapy in Cancer Pain: A 10-year Multicenter Retrospective Study
Issued Date
2023-01-01
Resource Type
eISSN
24740527
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85175113041
Journal Title
Canadian Journal of Pain
Volume
7
Issue
1
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Canadian Journal of Pain Vol.7 No.1 (2023)
Suggested Citation
Thepsuwan A., Tontisirin N., Euasobhon P., Pannangpetch P., Leerapan B., Pattanaprateep O., Cohen S.P. Cost-Effectiveness and Cost–Utility Analyses in Thailand of Continuous Intrathecal Morphine Infusion Compared with Conventional Therapy in Cancer Pain: A 10-year Multicenter Retrospective Study. Canadian Journal of Pain Vol.7 No.1 (2023). doi:10.1080/24740527.2023.2225564 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/90942
Title
Cost-Effectiveness and Cost–Utility Analyses in Thailand of Continuous Intrathecal Morphine Infusion Compared with Conventional Therapy in Cancer Pain: A 10-year Multicenter Retrospective Study
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: Because of the high initial cost of intrathecal drug delivery (ITDD) therapy, this study investigated the cost-effectiveness and cost–utility of ITDD therapy in refractory cancer pain management in Thailand over the past 10 years. Methods: The retrospective study was conducted in patients with cancer pain who underwent ITDD therapy from January 2011 to 2021 at three university hospitals. Clinical outcomes included the numerical rating scale (NRS), Palliative Performance Scale, and the EQ-5D. The direct medical and nonmedical as well as indirect costs were also recorded. Cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed comparing ITDD therapy with conventional therapy (extrapolated from costs of the same patient before ITDD therapy) from a societally oriented economic evaluation. Results: Twenty patients (F:M: 10:10) aged 60 ± 15 years who underwent implantation of an intrathecal percutaneous port (IT port; n = 15) or programmable intrathecal pump (IT pump; n = 5) were included. The median survival time was 78 (interquartile range = 121–54) days after ITDD therapy. At 2-month follow-up, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)/pain reduction of an IT port (US$2065.36 (CA$2829.54)/2-point NRS reduction/lifetime) was lower than for patients with an IT pump (US$5479.26 (CA$7506.58)/2-point NRS reduction/lifetime) compared with continued conventional therapy. The ICER/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained for an IT port compared with conventional treatment was US$93,999.31(CA$128,799.06)/QALY gained, which is above the cost-effectiveness threshold for Thailand. Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness and cost–utility of IT port therapy for cancer pain was high relative to the cost of living in Thailand, above the cost-effectiveness threshold. Prospective cost analysis studies enrolling more patients with diverse cancers that investigate the benefit of early ITDD therapy with devices over a range of prices are warranted.