Cost Effectiveness of Interventions for Lateral Epicondylitis
- 141 Downloads
Objective: Lateral epicondylitis is a common complaint, with an annual incidence between 1% and 3% in the general population. The Dutch College of General Practitioners in The Netherlands has issued guidelines that recommend a wait-and-see policy. However, these guidelines are not evidence based.
Design and setting: This paper presents the results of an economic evaluation in conjunction with a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effects of three interventions in primary care for patients with lateral epicondylitis.
Patients and interventions: Patients with pain at the lateral side of the elbow were randomised to one of three interventions: a wait-and-see policy, corticosteroid injections or physiotherapy.
Main outcome measures and results: Clinical outcomes included general improvement, pain during the day, elbow disability and QOL. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Direct and indirect costs (in 1999 values) were measured by means of cost diaries over a period of 12 months. Differences in mean costs between groups were evaluated by applying non-parametric bootstrap techniques. The mean total costs per patient for corticosteroid injections were €430, compared with €631 for the wait-and-see policy and €921 for physiotherapy. After 12 months, the success rate in the physiotherapy group (91%) was significantly higher than in the injection group (69%), but only slightly higher than in the wait-and-see group (83%). The differences in costs and effects showed no dominance for any of the three groups. The incremental costutility ratios were (approximately): €7000 per utility gain for the wait-and-see policy versus corticosteroid injections; €12 000 per utility gain for physiotherapy versus corticosteroid injections, and €34 500 for physiotherapy versus the waitand- see policy.
Conclusions: The results of this economic evaluation provided no reason to update or amend the Dutch guidelines for GPs, which recommend a wait-and-see policy for patients with lateral epicondylitis.
KeywordsIndirect Cost Corticosteroid Injection Injection Group Lateral Epicondylitis Total Direct Cost
The work was funded by the Health Insurance Council Fund for Investigative Medicine and the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research. The authors have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this study.
- 2.Verhaar JA. Tennis elbow [thesis]. Maastricht: University Press, 1992Google Scholar
- 4.Murtagh JE. Tennis elbow. Aust Fam Physician 1988; 17: 90, 91, 94–5Google Scholar
- 7.Labelle H, Guibert R, Joncas J, et al. Lack of scientific evidence for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis of the elbow: an attempted meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg 1992; 74B: 646–51Google Scholar
- 8.Assendelft WJ, Rikken SA, Mel M, et al. NHG practice guideline for epicondylitis [in Dutch]. Huisarts Wet 1997; 40: 21–6Google Scholar
- 9.Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford Medical Publications, 1997Google Scholar
- 10.Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996Google Scholar
- 13.Stratford P, Levy DR, Levy K, et al. Extensor carpi radialis tendonitis: a validation of selected outcome measures. Physiother Can 1987; 39: 250–5Google Scholar
- 15.Kind P. The Euroqol Instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996: 191–201Google Scholar
- 18.Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. Handbook for cost studies, methods and guidelines for economic evaluation in health care [in Dutch]. Amstelveen: Health Care Insurance Council, 2000Google Scholar
- 20.Dutch Central Organisation for Health Care Charges. Tariffs for medical specialist, excluding psychiatrics: supplement to tariffs decision number 5600–1900-97–1 from 21 oktober 1996 [in Dutch]. Utrecht: Dutch Central Organisation for Health Care Charges, 1996Google Scholar
- 21.Taxe report [in Dutch]. The Hague: Z-index, 2000Google Scholar
- 23.Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. Indirect costs: the consequence of production loss or increased costs of production. Med Care 1996; 34: DS59–68Google Scholar
- 25.Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1993Google Scholar
- 33.Desgagn´e A, Castilloux AM, Angers JF, et al. The use of the bootstrap statistical method for the pharmacoeconomic cost analysis of skewed data. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (5): 487–97Google Scholar