Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: Post-stroke spasticity (PSS) is a common complication in stroke survivors, causing severe burden to patients living with it. The aim of this review was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of the treatment of post-stroke spasticity, in adults, with abobotulinumtoxinA compared to the best supportive care, based on results from a systematic literature review. Given that abobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNT-A) is always accompanied by the best supportive care treatment, the CEA compared aboBoNT-A plus the best supportive care with the best supportive care alone.
Methods: A systematic literature review in EMBASE (including Medline and PubMed), Scopus, and other sources (Google Scholar) was conducted. Articles of all types, providing information on the costs and/or effectiveness measures for the current treatments of PSS in adults were included. The synthesis of information from the review provided the parameters for the design of a cost-effectiveness analysis of the mentioned treatment of interest. The societal perspective was compared to a perspective where only direct costs were observed.
Results: In total, 532 abstracts were screened. Full information was revised from 40 papers and 13 of these were selected as core papers for full data extraction. Data from the core publications formed the basis for the development of a cost-effectiveness model. In all the included papers physiotherapy was the best supportive care treatment (SoC). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that even in the most conservative scenario, assuming the worst case scenario, the probability of a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained below €40,000, for aboBoNT-A together with physiotherapy is above 0.8, and with certainty below €50,000/QALY when either a direct costs, or a societal perspective was taken. On average, the probabilistic model obtains a negative mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of around -15,000 €/QALY.
Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness analyses show that aboBoNT-A together with physiotherapy would be a cost-effective treatment compared with physiotherapy alone, independently of the perspective considered.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.farma.2023.04.006 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!