A nationwide multicenter study of the cost effectiveness of five leading drugs for pharmacological management of cervicobrachial symptoms

Abstract

BackgroundCervicobrachial pain frequently affects the quality of life (QOL) of the general public and has a significant economic impact on the health care systems of various countries. There are a number of treatment options for this disease, including widely-used drug therapy, but the effectiveness of each option is indeterminate, and there have been no published cost-effectiveness analysis studies so far. This prospective observational study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of drug treatment for cervicobrachial symptoms. MethodsA 6-month medication regimen for each of five frequently-prescribed drugs for cervicobrachial symptoms was administered to 322 patients at 24 centers in Japan. Outcome measures, including of the EuroQol Group 5D, Short Form-8, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS), were investigated at baseline and every month thereafter. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of the drug cost to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. A stratified analysis of patient characteristics was also performed to identify baseline factors potentially affecting cost-effectiveness. ResultsThe ICER of entire drug treatment for cervicobrachial symptoms was 7,491,640 yen. Compared with the reference willingness-to-pay, the ICER was assumed to not be cost-effective. A certain number of QALYs were gained during the first 3 months after the treatment intervention, but almost no QALYs were gained during the following 3 months. Stratified analysis showed that cost-effectiveness was extremely low for patients with high baseline VAS and high QOL. ConclusionsThe available medications for cervicobrachial symptoms did not have excellent cost-effectiveness. Although a certain number of QALYs were gained during the first 3 months after medication, no QALYs were gained in the latter half of the study period, suggesting that it is not advisable to continue the medication needlessly. Level of evidenceII, prospective cohort study.