Source:Brain Stimulation
Author(s): Pieter Ooms, Matthijs Blankers, Martijn Figee, Isidoor O. Bergfeld, Pepijn van den Munckhof, P. Richard Schuurman, Damiaan Denys
BackgroundDeep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is effective for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but requires expensive medical procedures. To date, no study has examined the cost-effectiveness of DBS for OCD.ObjectiveTo perform the first economic evaluation of DBS for therapy refractory OCD.MethodsWe conducted a 2-year prospective, open cost-effectiveness study, comparing DBS (n=17) with treatment as usual (TAU) (n=11), with cost per Quality-Adjusted-Life-Year (QALY) as outcome measure. Apart from the base-case, or primary analysis, we conducted two practice-based scenarios: (1) standard care scenario, without research and innovation costs, and (2) rechargeable scenario, in which we assume the use of a rechargeable battery. Base-case and both scenarios were extrapolated to four years to estimate long-term cost-effectiveness.ResultsCompared to TAU, DBS provides an additional 0.26 QALY (SD=0.16). Median cost per QALY gained is estimated at €141,446 for base-case, €115,916 for standard care and €65,394 for the rechargeable scenario. Extending the time-horizon to four years results in a median cost per QALY of €80,313 for base-case, €69,287 for standard care, and turned out to be cost-saving at €4,678 per QALY for the rechargeable scenario. Assuming a willingness to pay threshold of €80,000/QALY, DBS, under base-case and standard care had 25% and 35% probability of being more cost-effective than TAU. With the rechargeable scenario and in all scenarios extrapolated to four years, the probability of cost-effectiveness was equal or higher than TAU.ConclusionsThis study indicates DBS for OCD is cost-effective in the long-term, especially when rechargeable batteries are taken into account.
http://ift.tt/2oD8BMV
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου