Cost-effectiveness of 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy Compared With Conventional Medical Management Over the First 12 Months of Therapy for Patients With Nonsurgical Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: This analysis evaluated if spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at 10 kHz plus conventional medical management (CMM) is cost-effective compared with CMM alone for the treatment of nonsurgical refractory back pain (NSRBP). Methods: NSRBP subjects were randomized 1:1 into the 10-kHz SCS (n = 83) or CMM (n = 76) group. Outcomes assessed at 6 months included EQ-5D 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), medication usage, and healthcare utilization (HCU). There was an optional crossover at 6 months and follow-up to 12 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated with cost including all HCU and medications except for the initial device and implant procedure, and cost-effectiveness was analyzed based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of \u3c $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Results: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS resulted in a significant improvement in quality of life (QOL) over CMM (EQ-5D-5L index score change of 0.201 vs -0.042, p \u3c 0.001) at a lower cost, based on reduced frequency of HCU resulting in an ICER of -$4964 at 12 months. The ICER was -$8620 comparing the 6 months on CMM with postcrossover on 10-kHz SCS. Conclusions: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS provides higher QOL at a lower average cost per patient compared with CMM. Assuming an average reimbursement for device and procedure, 10-kHz SCS therapy is predicted to be cost-effective for the treatment of NSRBP compared with CMM within 2.1 years

Dementia care initiative in primary practice – study protocol of a cluster randomized trial on dementia management in a general practice setting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Current guidelines for dementia care recommend the combination of drug therapy with non-pharmaceutical measures like counselling and social support. However, the scientific evidence concerning non-pharmaceutical interventions for dementia patients and their informal caregivers remains inconclusive. Targets of modern comprehensive dementia care are to enable patients to live at home as long and as independent as possible and to reduce the burden of caregivers. The objective of the study is to compare a complex intervention including caregiver support groups and counselling against usual care in terms of time to nursing home placement. In this paper the study protocol is described.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The IDA (Initiative Demenzversorgung in der Allgemeinmedizin) project is designed as a three armed cluster-randomized trial where dementia patients and their informal caregivers are recruited by general practitioners. Patients in the study region of Middle Franconia, Germany, are included if they have mild or moderate dementia, are at least 65 years old, and are members of the German AOK (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse) sickness fund. In the control group patients receive regular treatment, whereas in the two intervention groups general practitioners participate in a training course in evidence based dementia treatment, recommend support groups and offer counseling to the family caregivers either beginning at baseline or after the 1-year follow-up. The study recruitment and follow-up took place from July 2005 to January 2009. 303 general practitioners were randomized of which 129 recruited a total of 390 patients. Time to nursing home admission within the two year intervention and follow-up period is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints are cognitive status, activities of daily living, burden of care giving as well as healthcare costs. For an economic analysis from the societal perspective, data are collected from caregivers as well as by the use of routine data from statutory health insurance and long-term care insurance.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>From a public health perspective, the IDA trial is expected to lead to evidence based results on the community effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical support measures for dementia patients and their caregivers in the primary care sector. For health policy makers it is necessary to make their decisions about financing new services based on strong knowledge about the acceptance of measures in the population and their cost-effectiveness.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN68329593</p

Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda

An unresolved issue in the field of implementation research is how to conceptualize and evaluate successful implementation. This paper advances the concept of “implementation outcomes” distinct from service system and clinical treatment outcomes. This paper proposes a heuristic, working “taxonomy” of eight conceptually distinct implementation outcomes—acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability—along with their nominal definitions. We propose a two-pronged agenda for research on implementation outcomes. Conceptualizing and measuring implementation outcomes will advance understanding of implementation processes, enhance efficiency in implementation research, and pave the way for studies of the comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies

Ageing in general practice (AGP) trial: a cluster randomised trial to examine the effectiveness of peer education on GP diagnostic assessment and management of dementia

Extent: 9p.Background: Dementia is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. An earlier rather than later diagnosis allows persons with dementia and their families to plan ahead and access appropriate management. However, most diagnoses are made by general practitioners (GPs) later in the course of the disease and are associated with management that is poorly adherent to recommended guidelines. This trial examines the effectiveness of a peer led dementia educational intervention for GPs. Methods: The study is a cluster randomised trial, conducted across three states and five sites. All GPs will complete an audit of their consenting patients aged 75 years or more at three time points - baseline, 12 and 24 months. GPs allocated to the intervention group will receive two educational sessions from a peer GP or nurse, and will administer the GPCOG to consenting patients at baseline and 12 months. The first education session will provide information about dementia and the second will provide individualised feedback on audit results. GPs in the waitlist group will receive the RACGP Guidelines by post following the 12 month audit Outcomes: Primary outcomes are carer and consumer quality of life and depression. Secondary outcomes include: rates of GP identification of dementia compared to a more detailed gold standard assessment conducted in the patient’s home; GP identification of differential diagnoses including reversible causes of cognitive impairment; and GP referral to specialists, Alzheimers’ Australia and support services. A “case finding” and a “screening” group will be compared and the psychometrics of the GPCOG will be examined. Sample size: Approximately 2,000 subjects aged 75 years and over will be recruited through approximately 160 GPs, to yield approximately 200 subjects with dementia (reducing to 168 by 24 months). Discussion: The trial outlined in this paper has been peer reviewed and supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. At the time of submission of this paper 2,034 subjects have been recruited and the intervention delivered to 114 GPs.Constance D Pond, Henry Brodaty, Nigel P Stocks, Jane Gunn, John Marley, Peter Disler, Parker Magin, Nerida Paterson, Graeme Horton, Susan Goode, Bronwen Paine and Karen E Mat