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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |