We have located links that may give you full text access.
Osteopathic care for low back pain and neck pain: A cost-utility analysis.
Complementary Therapies in Medicine 2018 October
OBJECTIVES: The aim was to examine the health and economic consequences of osteopathic care for low back pain and neck pain in addition to usual care compared to usual care alone.
DESIGN: A decision tree model considering a one-year time horizon was applied. The analysis occurred from a health insurance perspective only considering direct medical costs. The health effects were expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
MAIN OUTCOMES: The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The uncertainty around key input parameters was addressed applying one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (5000 simulations).
RESULTS: For low back pain, osteopathy resulted in cost savings (€385.1 vs €501.8/patient) at improved QALYs (0.666 vs. 0.614) compared to usual care. For neck pain, osteopathy resulted in additional costs (€577.3 vs. €521.0) and improved QALYs (0.639 vs. 0.609) resulting in an ICER of €1,870/QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis identified the hospitalization cost (back) and osteopathy cost (neck) as major cost drivers. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted in an average net saving of €163 (95%CI-€260, -€49.1) and a QALY gain of 0.06 (95%CI -0.06, 0.17) for low back pain and an average additional cost of €55.1 (95%CI €20.9, €129) and improved QALY gain of 0.03 (95%CI-0.06, 0.12) for neck pain.
CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathy was found to be a 'dominant' (low back pain) and cost-effective strategy (neck pain) compared to usual care. Further health economic evaluation studies considering a broader range of cost items and longer time horizon are required.
DESIGN: A decision tree model considering a one-year time horizon was applied. The analysis occurred from a health insurance perspective only considering direct medical costs. The health effects were expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
MAIN OUTCOMES: The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The uncertainty around key input parameters was addressed applying one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (5000 simulations).
RESULTS: For low back pain, osteopathy resulted in cost savings (€385.1 vs €501.8/patient) at improved QALYs (0.666 vs. 0.614) compared to usual care. For neck pain, osteopathy resulted in additional costs (€577.3 vs. €521.0) and improved QALYs (0.639 vs. 0.609) resulting in an ICER of €1,870/QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis identified the hospitalization cost (back) and osteopathy cost (neck) as major cost drivers. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted in an average net saving of €163 (95%CI-€260, -€49.1) and a QALY gain of 0.06 (95%CI -0.06, 0.17) for low back pain and an average additional cost of €55.1 (95%CI €20.9, €129) and improved QALY gain of 0.03 (95%CI-0.06, 0.12) for neck pain.
CONCLUSIONS: Osteopathy was found to be a 'dominant' (low back pain) and cost-effective strategy (neck pain) compared to usual care. Further health economic evaluation studies considering a broader range of cost items and longer time horizon are required.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app