A cost-consequences analysis of the effect of pregabalin in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain in routine medical practice in primary care settings.
BACKGROUND
Neuropathic pain (NeP) is a common symptom of a group of a variety of conditions, including diabetic neuropathy, trigeminal neuralgia, or postherpetic neuralgia. Prevalence of NeP has been estimated to range between 5-7.5%, and produces up to 25% of pain clinics consultations. Due to its severity, chronic evolution, and associated co-morbidities, NeP has an important individual and social impact. The objective was to analyze the effect of pregabalin (PGB) on pain alleviation and longitudinal health and non-health resources utilization and derived costs in peripheral refractory NeP in routine medical practice in primary care settings (PCS) in Spain.


METHODS
Subjects from PCS were older than 18 years, with peripheral NeP (diabetic neuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia or trigeminal neuralgia), refractory to at least one previous analgesic, and included in a prospective, real world, and 12-week two-visit cost-of-illness study. Measurement of resources utilization included both direct healthcare and indirect expenditures. Pain severity was measured by the Short Form-McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ).


RESULTS
One-thousand-three-hundred-fifty-four PGB-naive patients [58.8% women, 59.5 (12.7) years old] were found eligible for this secondary analysis: 598 (44%) switched from previous therapy to PGB given in monotherapy (PGBm), 589 (44%) received PGB as add-on therapy (PGB add-on), and 167 (12%) patients changed previous treatments to others different than PGB (non-PGB). Reductions of pain severity were higher in both PGBm and PGB add-on groups (54% and 51%, respectively) than in non-PGB group (34%), p < 0.001. Incremental drug costs, particularly in PGB subgroups [€ 34.6 (80.3), € 160.7 (123.9) and € 154.5 (133.0), for non-PGB, PGBm and PGBadd-on, respectively (p < 0.001)], were off-set by higher significant reductions in all other components of health costs yielding to a greater total cost reductions: -€ 1,045.3 (1,989.6),-€ 1,312.9 (1,543.0), and -€ 1,565.5 (2,004.1), for the three groups respectively (p = 0.03).


CONCLUSIONS
In Spanish primary care settings, PGB given either add-on or in monotherapy in routine medical practice was associated with pain alleviation leading to significant longitudinal reductions in resource use and total costs during the 12-week period of the study compared with non-PGB-therapy of patients with chronic NeP of peripheral origin. The use of non-appropriate analgesic therapies for neuropathic pain in a portion of subjects in non-PGB group could explain partially such findings.
Primary Care Health Centre Puerta del Ángel, Madrid, Spain. navarrosiguero@eresmas.com
Ana
A
Navarro
María T
MT
Saldaña
Concepción
C
Pérez
Sandra
S
Torrades
Javier
J
Rejas
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000700:Analgesics / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D017281:Cost of Illness; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis / Q000191:economics; D005260:Female; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006295:Health Resources / Q000191:economics* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009437:Neuralgia / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics; D000069583:Pregabalin; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000191:economics*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013030:Spain; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D005680:gamma-Aminobutyric Acid / Q000031:analogs & derivatives* / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use
D000700:Analgesics; D000069583:Pregabalin; D005680:gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
CMAJ. 2006 Aug 1;175(3):265-75
16880448
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Oct;23(10):2585-96
17875242
Pain Med. 2004 Jun;5(2):143-5
15209966
Acta Clin Belg. 2008 May-Jun;63(3):170-8
18714847
Curr Med Res Opin. 2004 Nov;20(11):1805-14
15537481
Pain. 1987 Aug;30(2):191-197
3670870
J Diabetes Complications. 2006 Jan-Feb;20(1):26-33
16389164
Br Med Bull. 1991 Jul;47(3):644-66
1794077
J Pain. 2004 Apr;5(3):143-9
15106126
Neurology. 2004 Dec 14;63(11):2104-10
15596757
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 Oct;30(4):374-85
16256902
Pain. 2005 Dec 5;118(3):289-305
16213659
Pain. 2005 Jun;115(3):254-263
15911152
Pain Pract. 2006 Sep;6(3):153-60
17147591
Clin Ther. 2006 Nov;28(11):1922-34
17213013
Pain. 2004 May;109(1-2):26-35
15082123
Neurology. 2003 Apr 22;60(8):1274-83
12707429
Clin Ther. 2007 Jan;29(1):26-48
17379045
J Pain. 2005 Apr;6(4):253-60
15820913
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Feb;22(2):375-84
16466610
Clin J Pain. 2007 Feb;23(2):143-9
17237663
Hosp Med. 2000 Nov;61(11):760-6
11198743
Clin J Pain. 2007 Jan;23(1):15-22
17277640
Eur J Pain. 2006 Feb;10(2):161-6
16310720
Eur J Pharmacol. 2001 Oct 19;429(1-3):1-11
11698022
Pain Med. 2010 May;11(5):719-31
20345618
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2007 Oct;20(5):456-72
17873599
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Dec 04;5:66
18053212
Cephalalgia. 1996 Jun;16(4):231-8; discussion 215
8792034
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2005 Aug;19(4):671-84
15949783
Age Ageing. 2006 Mar;35(2):132-7
16431855
Clin Drug Investig. 2007;27(11):771-82
17914896
Am J Manag Care. 2006 Jun;12(9 Suppl):S263-8
16774458
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Aug;55(8):1176-84
17661955
J Pain. 2006 Dec;7(12):892-900
17157775
Pain. 2004 Aug;110(3):628-638
15288403
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2003 May;25(5 Suppl):S12-7
12694988
J Pain. 2006 Feb;7(2):119-28
16459277
Eur J Pain. 2006 Feb;10(2):127-35
16310716