Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of wrist and hand disability due to upper-limb post-stroke spasticity in Scotland

Q. V. Doan, P. Gillard, A. Brashear, M. Halperin, E. Hayward, S. Varon, Z. J. Lu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and purpose: The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating upper-limb post-stroke spasticity (ULPSS) with usual care (UC) plus onabotulinumtoxinA versus UC alone in Scotland. Methods: We developed a model to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from treating ULPSS. Efficacy data and health utilities were taken from clinical trials. Unit costs were taken from published Scottish sources. We compared UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA and UC alone in three scenarios: (i) a scenario from the National Health Service perspective, which included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and day-hospital visits; (ii) a scenario that only included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use and specialist visits; and (iii) a scenario from a societal perspective that included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and caregiver burden. Results: In the first scenario, the model predicted that UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced 0.107 QALYs at an additional cost of £1099 compared with UC alone over 5years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10271/QALY. In the second scenario, the ICER increased to £27134/QALY. In the third scenario (societal perspective), UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced lower total cost and higher QALYs, and therefore was superior to UC alone. Conclusions: Based on a model, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA improved disability, which translated into greater QALYs but also increased direct medical costs compared with UC alone; however, the resulting ICER can be considered cost-effective. Moreover, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA can be cost-saving if reduction in caregiver burden was included. OnabotulinumtoxinA offers value for money in the management of ULPSS in Scotland.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)773-780
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Journal of Neurology
Volume20
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Scotland
Wrist
Upper Extremity
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hand
Stroke
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Costs and Cost Analysis
Therapeutics
Caregivers
onabotulinumtoxinA
National Health Programs
Clinical Trials
Health

Keywords

  • Botulinum toxin
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • OnabotulinumtoxinA
  • Spasticity
  • Stroke

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of wrist and hand disability due to upper-limb post-stroke spasticity in Scotland. / Doan, Q. V.; Gillard, P.; Brashear, A.; Halperin, M.; Hayward, E.; Varon, S.; Lu, Z. J.

In: European Journal of Neurology, Vol. 20, No. 5, 01.05.2013, p. 773-780.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Doan, Q. V. ; Gillard, P. ; Brashear, A. ; Halperin, M. ; Hayward, E. ; Varon, S. ; Lu, Z. J. / Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of wrist and hand disability due to upper-limb post-stroke spasticity in Scotland. In: European Journal of Neurology. 2013 ; Vol. 20, No. 5. pp. 773-780.
@article{cfbf938ef9454ae29c6059d179a77dc7,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of wrist and hand disability due to upper-limb post-stroke spasticity in Scotland",
abstract = "Background and purpose: The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating upper-limb post-stroke spasticity (ULPSS) with usual care (UC) plus onabotulinumtoxinA versus UC alone in Scotland. Methods: We developed a model to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from treating ULPSS. Efficacy data and health utilities were taken from clinical trials. Unit costs were taken from published Scottish sources. We compared UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA and UC alone in three scenarios: (i) a scenario from the National Health Service perspective, which included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and day-hospital visits; (ii) a scenario that only included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use and specialist visits; and (iii) a scenario from a societal perspective that included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and caregiver burden. Results: In the first scenario, the model predicted that UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced 0.107 QALYs at an additional cost of £1099 compared with UC alone over 5years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10271/QALY. In the second scenario, the ICER increased to £27134/QALY. In the third scenario (societal perspective), UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced lower total cost and higher QALYs, and therefore was superior to UC alone. Conclusions: Based on a model, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA improved disability, which translated into greater QALYs but also increased direct medical costs compared with UC alone; however, the resulting ICER can be considered cost-effective. Moreover, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA can be cost-saving if reduction in caregiver burden was included. OnabotulinumtoxinA offers value for money in the management of ULPSS in Scotland.",
keywords = "Botulinum toxin, Cost-effectiveness, OnabotulinumtoxinA, Spasticity, Stroke",
author = "Doan, {Q. V.} and P. Gillard and A. Brashear and M. Halperin and E. Hayward and S. Varon and Lu, {Z. J.}",
year = "2013",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/ene.12062",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "773--780",
journal = "European Journal of Neurology",
issn = "1351-5101",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of wrist and hand disability due to upper-limb post-stroke spasticity in Scotland

AU - Doan, Q. V.

AU - Gillard, P.

AU - Brashear, A.

AU - Halperin, M.

AU - Hayward, E.

AU - Varon, S.

AU - Lu, Z. J.

PY - 2013/5/1

Y1 - 2013/5/1

N2 - Background and purpose: The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating upper-limb post-stroke spasticity (ULPSS) with usual care (UC) plus onabotulinumtoxinA versus UC alone in Scotland. Methods: We developed a model to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from treating ULPSS. Efficacy data and health utilities were taken from clinical trials. Unit costs were taken from published Scottish sources. We compared UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA and UC alone in three scenarios: (i) a scenario from the National Health Service perspective, which included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and day-hospital visits; (ii) a scenario that only included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use and specialist visits; and (iii) a scenario from a societal perspective that included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and caregiver burden. Results: In the first scenario, the model predicted that UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced 0.107 QALYs at an additional cost of £1099 compared with UC alone over 5years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10271/QALY. In the second scenario, the ICER increased to £27134/QALY. In the third scenario (societal perspective), UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced lower total cost and higher QALYs, and therefore was superior to UC alone. Conclusions: Based on a model, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA improved disability, which translated into greater QALYs but also increased direct medical costs compared with UC alone; however, the resulting ICER can be considered cost-effective. Moreover, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA can be cost-saving if reduction in caregiver burden was included. OnabotulinumtoxinA offers value for money in the management of ULPSS in Scotland.

AB - Background and purpose: The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating upper-limb post-stroke spasticity (ULPSS) with usual care (UC) plus onabotulinumtoxinA versus UC alone in Scotland. Methods: We developed a model to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from treating ULPSS. Efficacy data and health utilities were taken from clinical trials. Unit costs were taken from published Scottish sources. We compared UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA and UC alone in three scenarios: (i) a scenario from the National Health Service perspective, which included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and day-hospital visits; (ii) a scenario that only included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use and specialist visits; and (iii) a scenario from a societal perspective that included differences in onabotulinumtoxinA use, specialist visits and caregiver burden. Results: In the first scenario, the model predicted that UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced 0.107 QALYs at an additional cost of £1099 compared with UC alone over 5years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10271/QALY. In the second scenario, the ICER increased to £27134/QALY. In the third scenario (societal perspective), UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA produced lower total cost and higher QALYs, and therefore was superior to UC alone. Conclusions: Based on a model, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA improved disability, which translated into greater QALYs but also increased direct medical costs compared with UC alone; however, the resulting ICER can be considered cost-effective. Moreover, UC plus onabotulinumtoxinA can be cost-saving if reduction in caregiver burden was included. OnabotulinumtoxinA offers value for money in the management of ULPSS in Scotland.

KW - Botulinum toxin

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - OnabotulinumtoxinA

KW - Spasticity

KW - Stroke

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876310594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876310594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ene.12062

DO - 10.1111/ene.12062

M3 - Article

C2 - 23278954

AN - SCOPUS:84876310594

VL - 20

SP - 773

EP - 780

JO - European Journal of Neurology

JF - European Journal of Neurology

SN - 1351-5101

IS - 5

ER -