Modeling the cost–benefit of nerve conduction studies in pre-employment screening for carpal tunnel syndrome

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the costs associated with pre-employment nerve conduction testing as a screening tool for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in the workplace. METHODS: We used a Markov decision analysis model to compare the costs associated with a strategy of screening all prospective employees for CTS and not hiring those with abnormal nerve conduction, versus a strategy of no screening for CTS. The variables included in our model included employee turnover rate, the incidence of CTS, the prevalence of median nerve conduction abnormalities, the relative risk of developing CTS conferred by abnormal NCS, the costs of pre-employment screening, and the workers' compensation costs to the employer for a case of CTS. RESULTS: In our base case, total employer costs for CTS from the perspective of the employer (cost of screening plus costs for workers' compensation associated with CTS) were higher when screening was used. Median costs per employee position over five years were $503 for the screening strategy vs.$200 for a strategy of no screening. Sensitivity analysis showed that a strategy of screening was cost-beneficial from the perspective of the employer only under a few circumstances. In Monte Carlo simulation varying all parameters, we found a 30% probability that screening would be cost-beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of pre-employment screening for CTS should be carefully evaluated for yield and social consequences before being implemented. Our model suggests such screening is not appropriate for most employers

Demonstration of an online tool to assist managed care formulary evidence-based decision making: meta-analysis of topical prostaglandin analog efficacy

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this paper was to demonstrate the use of an online service for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of topical prostaglandin analogs in reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. METHODS: An online service provider (Doctor Evidence) reviewed and extracted data from the peer-reviewed literature through September 2009. Randomized controlled studies of at least three months’ duration assessing at least two prostaglandin analogs in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, ocular hypertension, or normal-tension glaucoma were included. The primary endpoint was mean IOP. Summary estimates were created using random-effects models. The Q Chi-square test was used to assess statistical heterogeneity. RESULTS: Sixteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. On average, greater IOP-lowering was seen with bimatoprost relative to latanoprost (1 mmHg, P = 0.025) and travoprost (0.8 mmHg, P = 0.033) based on mean IOP after 12–26 weeks of treatment. No statistical difference was observed in IOP-lowering between latanoprost and travoprost (P = 0.841). Findings were similar to previously published meta-analyses of topical prostaglandin analogs. CONCLUSION: Systematic reviews relying on meta-analytic techniques to create summary statistics are considered to be the “gold standard” for synthesizing evidence to support clinical decision-making. However, the process is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and outside the capability of most formulary managers. We have demonstrated the effectiveness of a commercial service that facilitates the process of conducting such reviews

Persistence to Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies and onabotulinumtoxinA Among Patients With Migraine: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: To date, real-world evidence on persistence to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or onabotulinumtoxinA have excluded eptinezumab. This retrospective cohort study was performed to compare treatment persistency among patients with migraine on anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, or eptinezumab) or onabotulinumtoxinA. METHODS: This retrospective study used IQVIA PharmMetrics data. Adult patients with migraine treated with an anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA who had 12 months of continuous insurance enrollment before starting treatment were included. A most recent treatment episode analysis was used in which the most recent episode was defined as the latest treatment period with the same drug (anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA) without a ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply on/after June 25, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Patients were indexed at the start of their most recent episode. Patients were considered non-persistent and discontinued the therapy associated with their most recent episode if there was ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply. A Cox proportional-hazards model estimated the discontinuation hazard between treatments. The gap periods and cohort definition were varied in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The study included 66,576 patients (median age 46 years, 88.6% female). More eptinezumab-treated patients had chronic migraine (727/1074), ≥ 3 previous acute (323/1074) or preventive (333/1074) therapies, and more prior treatment episodes (3) than other treatment groups. Based on a 15-day treatment gap, patients on subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs had a 32% (95% CI: 1.19, 1.49; erenumab), 42% (95% CI: 1.27, 1.61; galcanezumab), and 58% (95% CI: 1.42, 1.80; fremanezumab) higher discontinuation hazard than those receiving eptinezumab, with this relationship attenuated, but still statistically significant based on 30-day and 60-day treatment gaps. There was no significant difference in the discontinuation hazard between eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. Based on a 15-day treatment gap among patients who newly initiated therapy, the discontinuation hazard of subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs remained significantly higher compared to eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with eptinezumab demonstrated persistency that was higher than subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs and similar to onabotulinumtoxinA

A modelling approach to estimate the prevalence of treatment-resistant schizophrenia in the United States.

INTRODUCTION:Schizophrenia is a condition that places a significant burden on individuals with the condition, their family, and society. A large proportion of those treated for schizophrenia do not experience treatment response and are referred to as having "treatment-resistant schizophrenia" (TRS). Expert opinion has long held that the prevalence of TRS among individuals with schizophrenia is 30%, but the basis of this estimate is unclear. This article presents a model developed for estimating the prevalence of TRS in the United States 2014. METHODS:An incidence-prevalence-mortality model was developed to estimate the prevalence of TRS in the United States. The model was populated with data from public health agencies and published literature. Prevalence in 2014 was modelled using a Markov cohort simulation for each birth cohort between 1930 to 2014. RESULTS:Using different scenarios for baseline incidence, relative risks of mortality, it was estimated that approximately 22% of individuals with schizophrenia would be considered treatment-resistant in 2014. DISCUSSION:The results suggests that prevalence of TRS may be somewhat lower than the 30% often reported, however this is highly dependent on the definition of treatment resistance. Methods such as this may help answer epidemiological and health policy questions as well as test the influence of key underlying assumptions

Comparison of indirect treatment methods in migraine prevention to address differences in mode of administration

Aim: Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) are anchored on a placebo comparator, and the placebo response may vary according to drug administration route. Migraine preventive treatment studies were used to evaluate ITCs and determine whether mode of administration influences placebo response and the overall study findings. Materials & methods: Change from baseline in monthlymigraine days produced by monoclonal antibody treatments (subcutaneous, intravenous) was compared using fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), network meta-regression (NMR), and unanchored simulated treatment comparison (STC). Results: NMA and NMR provide mixed, rarely differentiated results between treatments, whereas unanchored STC strongly favors eptinezumab over other preventive treatments. Conclusion: Further investigations are needed to determine which ITC best reflects the impact of mode of administration on placebo