Cargando…

Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To explore differences in mean costs (from a UK National Health Service perspective) and effects of pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care evaluated in a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT), and to estimate optimal sample size for a definitive RCT. DESIGN: Regressi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Neilson, Aileen R, Bruhn, Hanne, Bond, Christine M, Elliott, Alison M, Smith, Blair H, Hannaford, Philip C, Holland, Richard, Lee, Amanda J, Watson, Margaret, Wright, David, McNamee, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4390732/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25833666
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006874
_version_ 1782365723699445760
author Neilson, Aileen R
Bruhn, Hanne
Bond, Christine M
Elliott, Alison M
Smith, Blair H
Hannaford, Philip C
Holland, Richard
Lee, Amanda J
Watson, Margaret
Wright, David
McNamee, Paul
author_facet Neilson, Aileen R
Bruhn, Hanne
Bond, Christine M
Elliott, Alison M
Smith, Blair H
Hannaford, Philip C
Holland, Richard
Lee, Amanda J
Watson, Margaret
Wright, David
McNamee, Paul
author_sort Neilson, Aileen R
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To explore differences in mean costs (from a UK National Health Service perspective) and effects of pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care evaluated in a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT), and to estimate optimal sample size for a definitive RCT. DESIGN: Regression analysis of costs and effects, using intention-to-treat and expected value of sample information analysis (EVSI). SETTING: Six general practices: Grampian (3); East Anglia (3). PARTICIPANTS: 125 patients with complete resource use and short form-six-dimension questionnaire (SF-6D) data at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to either pharmacist medication review with face-to-face pharmacist prescribing or pharmacist medication review with feedback to general practitioner or treatment as usual (TAU). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in mean total costs and effects measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 6 months and EVSI for sample size calculation. RESULTS: Unadjusted total mean costs per patient were £452 for prescribing (SD: £466), £570 for review (SD: £527) and £668 for TAU (SD: £1333). After controlling for baseline costs, the adjusted mean cost differences per patient relative to TAU were £77 for prescribing (95% CI −82 to 237) and £54 for review (95% CI −103 to 212). Unadjusted mean QALYs were 0.3213 for prescribing (SD: 0.0659), 0.3161 for review (SD: 0.0684) and 0.3079 for TAU (SD: 0.0606). Relative to TAU, the adjusted mean differences were 0.0069 for prescribing (95% CI −0.0091 to 0.0229) and 0.0097 for review (95% CI −0.0054 to 0.0248). The EVSI suggested the optimal future trial size was between 460 and 690, and between 540 and 780 patients per arm using a threshold of £30 000 and £20 000 per QALY gained, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TAU, pharmacist-led interventions for chronic pain appear more costly and provide similar QALYs. However, these estimates are imprecise due to the small size of the pilot trial. The EVSI indicates that a larger trial is necessary to obtain more precise estimates of differences in mean effects and costs between treatment groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN06131530.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4390732
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43907322015-04-13 Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial Neilson, Aileen R Bruhn, Hanne Bond, Christine M Elliott, Alison M Smith, Blair H Hannaford, Philip C Holland, Richard Lee, Amanda J Watson, Margaret Wright, David McNamee, Paul BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: To explore differences in mean costs (from a UK National Health Service perspective) and effects of pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care evaluated in a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT), and to estimate optimal sample size for a definitive RCT. DESIGN: Regression analysis of costs and effects, using intention-to-treat and expected value of sample information analysis (EVSI). SETTING: Six general practices: Grampian (3); East Anglia (3). PARTICIPANTS: 125 patients with complete resource use and short form-six-dimension questionnaire (SF-6D) data at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to either pharmacist medication review with face-to-face pharmacist prescribing or pharmacist medication review with feedback to general practitioner or treatment as usual (TAU). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in mean total costs and effects measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 6 months and EVSI for sample size calculation. RESULTS: Unadjusted total mean costs per patient were £452 for prescribing (SD: £466), £570 for review (SD: £527) and £668 for TAU (SD: £1333). After controlling for baseline costs, the adjusted mean cost differences per patient relative to TAU were £77 for prescribing (95% CI −82 to 237) and £54 for review (95% CI −103 to 212). Unadjusted mean QALYs were 0.3213 for prescribing (SD: 0.0659), 0.3161 for review (SD: 0.0684) and 0.3079 for TAU (SD: 0.0606). Relative to TAU, the adjusted mean differences were 0.0069 for prescribing (95% CI −0.0091 to 0.0229) and 0.0097 for review (95% CI −0.0054 to 0.0248). The EVSI suggested the optimal future trial size was between 460 and 690, and between 540 and 780 patients per arm using a threshold of £30 000 and £20 000 per QALY gained, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TAU, pharmacist-led interventions for chronic pain appear more costly and provide similar QALYs. However, these estimates are imprecise due to the small size of the pilot trial. The EVSI indicates that a larger trial is necessary to obtain more precise estimates of differences in mean effects and costs between treatment groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN06131530. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4390732/ /pubmed/25833666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006874 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Neilson, Aileen R
Bruhn, Hanne
Bond, Christine M
Elliott, Alison M
Smith, Blair H
Hannaford, Philip C
Holland, Richard
Lee, Amanda J
Watson, Margaret
Wright, David
McNamee, Paul
Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title_full Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title_short Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
title_sort pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: costs and benefits in a pilot randomised controlled trial
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4390732/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25833666
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006874
work_keys_str_mv AT neilsonaileenr pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bruhnhanne pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bondchristinem pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT elliottalisonm pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT smithblairh pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hannafordphilipc pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hollandrichard pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT leeamandaj pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT watsonmargaret pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT wrightdavid pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT mcnameepaul pharmacistledmanagementofchronicpaininprimarycarecostsandbenefitsinapilotrandomisedcontrolledtrial