The European Journal of Health Economics

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 209–219 | Cite as

Quality of life and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture treatment in patients with osteoarthritis pain

  • Thomas Reinhold
  • Claudia M. Witt
  • Susanne Jena
  • Benno Brinkhaus
  • Stefan N. Willich
Original paper

Abstract

To assess quality of life (QoL), costs, and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture treatment plus routine care versus routine care alone in osteoarthritis patients, a randomised, controlled trial was conducted in 255 general practices in Germany. Four hundred and eighty-nine patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee or hip were included to evaluated QoL and costs at baseline and after 3 months using health insurance funds data and standardized questionnaires. Patients receiving acupuncture had an improved QoL associated with significantly higher costs over the 3 months treatment period compared to routine care alone (mean cost-difference: €469.50 [95%CI €135.80–€803.19]). This increase in costs was primarily due to the costs of acupuncture. The overall ICER was €17,845 per QALY gained. The degree of cost-effectiveness was influenced by gender, with female patients achieving a better cost-effectiveness ratio than men. In conclusion, acupuncture was a cost-effective treatment strategy in patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain.

Keywords

Cost-effectiveness Acupuncture Routine care Randomised controlled trial Osteoarthritis pain 

References

  1. 1.
    American College of Rheumatology Subcommittee on Osteoarthritis Guidelines: Recommendations for the medical management of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: 2000 update. Arthritis. Rheum. 43, 1905 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badley, E.M.: Population projections and the effect on rheumatology. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 50, 3 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berman, B.M., Lao, L., Langenberg, P., Lee, W.L., Gilpin, A.M., Hochberg, M.C.: Effectiveness of acupuncture as adjunctive therapy in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 141, 901 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health. Econ. 21, 271 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brinkhaus, B., Witt, C.M., Jena, S., Linde, K., Streng, A., Wagenpfeil, S., Irnich, D., Walther, H.U., Melchart, D., Willich, S.N.: Acupuncture in patients with chronic low back pain–a randomised controlled trial. Arch. Intern. Med. 166, 450 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bullinger, M., Kirchberger, I.: SF-36 Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand. Hogrefe, Göttingen (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Claxton, K.: The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J. Health. Econ. 18, 341 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coyle, D., Tolley, K.: Discounting of health benefits in the pharmacoeconomic analysis of drug therapies: an issue for debate? Pharmacoeconomics 2, 153 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Creamer, P., Hochberg, M.C.: Osteoarthritis. Lancet 350, 503 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eisenberg, D.M., Davis, R.B., Ettner, S.L., Appel, S., Wilkey, S., Van-Rompay, M., Kessler, R.C.: Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 280, 1569 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Elders, M.J.: The increasing impact of arthritis on public health. J. Rheumatol. Suppl. 60, 6 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ezzo, J., Hadhazy, V., Birch, S., Lao, L., Kaplan, G., Hochberg, M., Berman, B.: Acupuncture for osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review. Arthritis. Rheum. 44, 819 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Federal statistical department Germany population health insurance coverage, Germany 2003. Statistical annual for Germany 2004. 2004Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gosden, T., Forland, F., Kristiansen, I.S., Sutton, M., Leese, B., Giuffrida, A., Sergison, M., Pedersen, L.: Capitation, salary, fee-for-service and mixed systems of payment: effects on the behaviour of primary care physicians. Cochrane. Database. Syst. Rev. CD002215 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gosden, T., Forland, F., Kristiansen, I.S., Sutton, M., Leese, B., Giuffrida, A., Sergison, M., Pedersen, L.: Impact of payment method on behaviour of primary care physicians: a systematic review. J. Health. Serv. Res. Policy 6, 44 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gupta, S., Hawker, G.A., Laporte, A., Croxford, R., Coyte, P.C.: The economic burden of disabling hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) from the perspective of individuals living with this condition. Rheumatology. (Oxford) 44, 1531 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hanoverian Consensus-Group: German recommendations for health economic evaluations–revised version of the Hanover Consensus. Gesundh. Ökon. Qual. Manag. 4, A62–A65 (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Härtel, U., Volger, E.: Inanspruchnahme und akzeptanz klassischer naturheilverfahren und alternativer heilmethoden in Deutschland-ergebnisse einer repräsentativen bevölkerungsstudie. Forsch. Komplementärmed. Klass. Naturheilkd. 11, 327 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung, Einheitlicher Bewertungsmaßstab 2000 plus (EBM2000plus), 2007Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kosinski, M., Keller, S.D., Hatoum, H.T., Kong, S.X., Ware, J.E. Jr.: The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability. Med. Care. 37, MS10–MS22 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kosinski, M., Keller, S.D., Ware, J.E., Jr., Hatoum, H.T., Kong, S.X.: The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: relative validity of scales in relation to clinical measures of arthritis severity. Med. Care. 37, MS23–MS39 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lothgren, M., Zethraeus, N.: Definition, interpretation and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health. Econ. 9, 623 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murray, C.J., Lopez, A.D.: Global mortality, disability, and the contribution of risk factors: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 349, 1436 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Paterson, C., Britten, N.: Acupuncture as a complex intervention: a holistic model. J. Altern. Complement. Med. 10, 791 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Patrick, D.L., Ramsey, S.D., Spencer, A.C., Kinne, S., Belza, B., Topolski, T.D.: Economic evaluation of aquatic exercise for persons with osteoarthritis. Med. Care. 39, 413 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pickard, A.S., Wang, Z., Walton, S.M., Lee, T.A.: Are decisions using cost-utility analyses robust to choice of SF-36/SF-12 preference-based algorithm? Health. Qual. Life. Outcomes. 3, 11 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Raftery, J.: NICE: faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies. BMJ 323, 1300 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Richardson, G., Manca, A.: Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency. Health. Econ. 13, 1203 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Spiegel, B.M., Targownik, L., Dulai, G.S., Gralnek, I.M.: The cost-effectiveness of cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors in the management of chronic arthritis. Ann. Intern. Med. 20(138), 795 (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Thomas, K.J., Nicholl, J.P., Coleman, P.: Use and expenditure on complementary medicine in England: a population based survey. Complement. Ther. Med. 9, 2 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 30.
    Thomas, K.J., MacPherson, H., Ratcliffe, J., Thorpe, L., Brazier, J., Campbell, M., Fitter, M., Roman, M., Walters, S., Nicholl, J.P.: Longer term clinical and economic benefits of offering acupuncture care to patients with chronic low back pain. Health. Technol. Assess. 9, 1 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thompson, S.G., Barber, J.A.: How should cost data in pragmatic randomised trials be analysed? BMJ 320, 1197 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tramer, M.R., Moore, R.A., Reynolds, D.J., McQuay, H.J.: Quantitative estimation of rare adverse events which follow a biological progression: a new model applied to chronic NSAID use. Pain 85, 169 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vickers, A., Zollman, C.: ABC of complementary medicine. Acupuncture. BMJ 319, 973 (1999)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Willich, S.N., Reinhold, T., Selim, D., Jena, S., Brinkhaus, B., Witt, C.M.: Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture treatment in patients with chronic neck pain. Pain 125, 107 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Witt, C., Brinkhaus, B., Jena, S., Linde, K., Streng, A., Wagenpfeil, S., Hummelsberger, J., Walther, H.U., Melchart, D., Willich, S.N.: Acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomised trial. Lancet 366, 136 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Witt, C., Brinkhaus, B., Jena, S., Selim, D., Straub, J., Willich, S.N.: Wirksamkeit, sicherheit und wirtschaftlichkeit der akupunktur-ein modellvorhaben mit der techniker krankenkasse. Dtsch. Arztebl. 103, A196 (2006)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Witt, C.M., Jena, S., Brinkhaus, B., Liecker, B., Wegscheider, K., Willich, S.N.: Acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and the hip. Arthritis. and Rheum. 4, 3485 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wonderling, D., Vickers, A.J., Grieve, R., McCarney, R.: Cost effectiveness analysis of a randomised trial of acupuncture for chronic headache in primary care. BMJ 328, 747 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Yen, Z.S., Lai, M.S., Wang, C.T., Chen, L.S., Chen, S.C., Chen, W.J., Hou, S.M.: Cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for osteoarthritis of the knee in Taiwan. J. Rheumatol. 31, 1797 (2004)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zethraeus, N., Johannesson, M., Jonsson, B., Lothgren, M., Tambour, M.: Advantages of using the net-benefit approach for analysing uncertainty in economic evaluation studies. Pharmacoeconomics 21, 39 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Reinhold
    • 1
  • Claudia M. Witt
    • 1
  • Susanne Jena
    • 1
  • Benno Brinkhaus
    • 1
  • Stefan N. Willich
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health EconomicsCharité University Medical CenterBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations