Cargando…

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

The lack of adequate treatment for many patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has led to high medical costs ($90B in 2020). An analysis of the cost-effectiveness (cost-utility) of reSET-O, the first and only FDA-approved prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) for the treatment of OUD, is needed to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Velez, Fulton F., Malone, Daniel C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Routledge 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8381930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34434535
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2021.1966187
_version_ 1783741457231773696
author Velez, Fulton F.
Malone, Daniel C.
author_facet Velez, Fulton F.
Malone, Daniel C.
author_sort Velez, Fulton F.
collection PubMed
description The lack of adequate treatment for many patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has led to high medical costs ($90B in 2020). An analysis of the cost-effectiveness (cost-utility) of reSET-O, the first and only FDA-approved prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) for the treatment of OUD, is needed to inform value assessments and healthcare decision making. To evaluate the cost-utility of reSET-O in conjunction with treatment-as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone. A third-party payer-perspective decision analytic model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of reSET-O + TAU relative to TAU (i.e., oral buprenorphine, face-to-face counseling, and contingency management [immediate rewards for negative drug tests logged]) alone over 12 weeks. Clinical effectiveness data (retention in therapy and health state utilities) were obtained from the peer-reviewed literature, while resource utilization and cost data were obtained from a published claims data analyses. Over 12 weeks, the addition of reSET-O to TAU resulted in a gain of 0.003 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and $1,014 lower costs, resulting in economic dominance vs. TAU. reSET-O + TAU’s was economically dominant (less costly, more effective) vs. TAU alone over 12 weeks, a result that was driven by a reduction in medical costs after initiation of reSET-O observed in a recent real-world claims analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8381930
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Routledge
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83819302021-08-24 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder Velez, Fulton F. Malone, Daniel C. J Mark Access Health Policy Short Communication The lack of adequate treatment for many patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has led to high medical costs ($90B in 2020). An analysis of the cost-effectiveness (cost-utility) of reSET-O, the first and only FDA-approved prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) for the treatment of OUD, is needed to inform value assessments and healthcare decision making. To evaluate the cost-utility of reSET-O in conjunction with treatment-as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone. A third-party payer-perspective decision analytic model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of reSET-O + TAU relative to TAU (i.e., oral buprenorphine, face-to-face counseling, and contingency management [immediate rewards for negative drug tests logged]) alone over 12 weeks. Clinical effectiveness data (retention in therapy and health state utilities) were obtained from the peer-reviewed literature, while resource utilization and cost data were obtained from a published claims data analyses. Over 12 weeks, the addition of reSET-O to TAU resulted in a gain of 0.003 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and $1,014 lower costs, resulting in economic dominance vs. TAU. reSET-O + TAU’s was economically dominant (less costly, more effective) vs. TAU alone over 12 weeks, a result that was driven by a reduction in medical costs after initiation of reSET-O observed in a recent real-world claims analysis. Routledge 2021-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8381930/ /pubmed/34434535 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2021.1966187 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Short Communication
Velez, Fulton F.
Malone, Daniel C.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title_full Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title_fullStr Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title_full_unstemmed Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title_short Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Prescription Digital Therapeutic for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of a prescription digital therapeutic for the treatment of opioid use disorder
topic Short Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8381930/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34434535
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2021.1966187
work_keys_str_mv AT velezfultonf costeffectivenessanalysisofaprescriptiondigitaltherapeuticforthetreatmentofopioidusedisorder
AT malonedanielc costeffectivenessanalysisofaprescriptiondigitaltherapeuticforthetreatmentofopioidusedisorder