Interdisziplinäre, multimodale Schmerztherapie vs. konventionelle Therapie

Digital Therapeutic Care Apps With Decision-Support Interventions for People With Low Back Pain in Germany: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Digital therapeutic care apps provide a new effective and scalable approach for people with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). Digital therapeutic care apps are also driven by personalized decision-support interventions that support the user in self-managing LBP, and may induce prolonged behavior change to reduce the frequency and intensity of pain episodes. However, these therapeutic apps are associated with high attrition rates, and the initial prescription cost is higher than that of face-to-face physiotherapy. In Germany, digital therapeutic care apps are now being reimbursed by statutory health insurance; however, price targets and cost-driving factors for the formation of the reimbursement rate remain unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a digital therapeutic care app compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in Germany. We further aimed to explore under which circumstances the reimbursement rate could be modified to consider value-based pricing.

METHODS

We developed a state-transition Markov model based on a best-practice analysis of prior LBP-related decision-analytic models, and evaluated the cost utility of a digital therapeutic care app compared to TAU in Germany. Based on a 3-year time horizon, we simulated the incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for people with nonacute LBP from the societal perspective. In the deterministic sensitivity and scenario analyses, we focused on diverging attrition rates and app cost to assess our model's robustness and conditions for changing the reimbursement rate. All costs are reported in Euro (€1=US $1.12).

RESULTS

Our base case results indicated that the digital therapeutic care strategy led to an incremental cost of €121.59, but also generated 0.0221 additional QALYs compared to the TAU strategy, with an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €5486 per QALY. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the reimbursement rate and the capability of digital therapeutic care to prevent reoccurring LBP episodes have a significant impact on the ICER. At the same time, the other parameters remained unaffected and thus supported the robustness of our model. In the scenario analysis, the different model time horizons and attrition rates strongly influenced the economic outcome. Reducing the cost of the app to €99 per 3 months or decreasing the app's attrition rate resulted in digital therapeutic care being significantly less costly with more generated QALYs, and is thus considered to be the dominant strategy over TAU.

CONCLUSIONS

The current reimbursement rate for a digital therapeutic care app in the statutory health insurance can be considered a cost-effective measure compared to TAU. The app's attrition rate and effect on the patient's prolonged behavior change essentially influence the settlement of an appropriate reimbursement rate. Future value-based pricing targets should focus on additional outcome parameters besides pain intensity and functional disability by including attrition rates and the app's long-term effect on quality of life.

The physician as a success determining factor in CT-guided pain therapy

BACKGROUND

Back pain is a common problem and a burden for the patient. MR-morphologically proven pain-causing changes of the spine is often successfully treated utilizing CT-guided pain therapy. The CT-guided execution enables a controlled and reproducible therapy. Nevertheless, treatment results can differ even with the same patient; the physician is a possible influencing factor of the outcome. Accordingly, the present study analyzes the different behaviors and forms of communication of the treating physicians during the course of the intervention as factors influencing the outcome of treatment.

METHODS

67 patients suffering from specific back pain were included in this study. 5 treating physicians (2 female, 3 male) of different age (29-63 years), and experience and a total of 244 CT-guided treatments were included in this study. In every case a psychologist observed the treatment based on a standardized observation protocol. Observed were both the verbal and non-verbal interactions as well as the reaction of patient and physician. The success of the therapy was measured in the course of the treatment using the visual analogue pain scale. The technical comparability of the performed CT-guided periradicular therapy was ensured by the distribution of the drug mixture.

RESULTS

The outcome is significantly better if the patient considers the treating physician to be competent (correlation coefficient: 0.24, p < 0.006) and feels understood (correlation coefficient: 0.29, p < 0.001). In addition, the outcome is better when the physician believes that the treatment brings a positive reduction of pain, underlining his belief with positive statements of affirmation before the intervention thus creating a positive atmosphere [correlation coefficient: 0.24 (p < 0.009)]. In contrast, the outcome is worse if the patient complains about pain during the intervention [average pain reduction M = 0.9 (pain group) vs. M = 2.0 (no-pain group)].

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that with comparable implementation of CT-guided periradicular therapy, the outcome of the patient with specific back pain can be significantly improved by certain behavioral patterns of the performing physician and this without side effects and without significant additional time expenditure. Our findings indicate that there is a non-negligible psychological factor linking confidence in therapy to actual therapy success.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was designed as an observational study, therefore a trial registration was not necessary.

Treatment Efficacy, Clinical Utility, and Cost-Effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Treatments for Persistent Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To review the current literature on the treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) for patients suffering from persistent (nonspecific) lower back pain (LBP) in relation to pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life, and work ability/sick leave.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic search of Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for English- and German-language literature published between January 2010 and July 2017. Study selection consisted of exclusion and inclusion phases. After screening for duplication, studies were excluded on the basis of criteria covering study design, number of participants, language of publication, and provision of information about the intervention. All the remaining articles dealing with the efficacy, utility, or cost-effectiveness of intensive (more than 25 hours per week) MBR encompassing at least 3 health domains and cognitive behavioral therapy-based psychological education were included.

RESULTS

The search retrieved 1199 publications of which 1116 were duplicates or met the exclusion criteria. Seventy of the remaining 83 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria; thus 13 studies were reviewed. All studies reporting changes in pain intensity or disability over 12 months after MBR reported moderate effect sizes and/or p-values for both outcomes. The effects on health-related quality of life were mixed, but MBR substantially reduced costs. Overall MBR produced an enduring improvement in work ability despite controversy and variable results.

CONCLUSIONS

MBR is an effective treatment for nonspecific LBP, but there is room for improvement in cost-effectiveness and impact on sick leave, where the evidence was less compelling.

[Clinical studies on multimodal pain therapy : Standardized measurement of therapy outcomes with a core outcome set]

Decision making in evidence-based medicine is based on general data on therapy outcomes as well as the effectiveness and safety in specific patient populations. Typically, findings concerning therapy outcomes from different studies are aggregated for a final conclusion. In this context a comparison of results is hampered by studies in which therapy outcomes are heterogeneously measured. Such methodological challenges exist for almost all areas of medical treatment, as well as for multimodal pain therapy (MMPT). Through establishing core outcome sets (COS) the required standardization of measurement of therapy outcomes in clinical research can be achieved. A COS is an evidence-based and consented minimum set consisting of outcome domains (i.e. partial aspects of the medical condition to be investigated, which have to be measured in order to give the best possible demonstration of therapy outcome of an intervention) accomplished by valid, reliable and sensitive measurement instruments which should be applied in each clinical trial. No such COS has so far been found for MMPT. The aim of this article is to give an overview about currently recommended methodological approaches to develop a COS accompanied by a brief introduction about existing COS initiatives focusing on chronic pain. The existing COS recommendations are discussed and conclusions are drawn on whether existing recommendations could also be applied for MMPT. Finally, the impact of healthcare research in Germany on a standardized assessment of therapy outcome in MMPT is outlined.

Health-care utilization of patients with chronic back pain before and after rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic back pain show an increased use of health-care services leading to high direct costs. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation reduces pain intensity, depression, disability and work inability. The study aims to investigate whether health-care utilization in patients with chronic back pain is lower after rehabilitation than before rehabilitation and if, in addition to sociodemographic, medical and psychological characteristics, changes in these characteristics immediately after rehabilitation can predict health-care utilization.

METHODS

N = 688 patients with chronic back pain were asked about their overall health-care services use and the use of general practitioners, specialists, physiotherapy, psychotherapy, complementary therapist, massages, and admission to hospital both 6 months before and 6 months after rehabilitation. In addition, various sociodemographic, medical and psychological variables were assessed. To measure changes due to rehabilitation, differences in pain intensity, disability, impairment and coping, quality of life, and days on sick leave before and after rehabilitation were calculated. Dependent t-tests and hierarchical regression analyses were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Health-care utilization 6 months after rehabilitation was, except for physiotherapy and psychotherapy, significantly lower than before. The effect sizes were rather small (Cohens'd =. 01-.34). After rehabilitation between 15.2% and 39.9% of the variance of health-care utilization could be explained. The baseline values of health-care utilization explained between 3.2% and 15.9% of the incremental variances. The changes in psychological impairment and coping as well as in sick leave after rehabilitation could explain between 0.8% and 2.9% of the variance of health-care utilization after rehabilitation. Its influence was significant for the general use of health-care services, general practitioners and specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that use of health-care services after rehabilitation in the present study is slightly lower than before, which has an impact on direct costs due to chronic back pain in Germany. The predictors show the importance in terms of health-care utilization of improving work ability and psychological impairment.

[Acute inpatient multimodal pain therapy and rehabilitation: Framework conditions, tasks and differentiated patient allocation]

Multimodal pain treatment programs are widely accepted as the medical treatment standard in the management of patients with chronic pain syndromes. The concepts and treatment strategies are based on the biopsychosocial model of pain and programs for early restoration of function. Although this concept is primarily implemented in the curative field, i.e. in hospitals for the treatment of patients with chronic pain diseases, modified programs based on the International Classification of Functioning (ICF) can now also be found in rehabilitation clinics. Despite the assumed similarities, significant differences in, for example the aims of the therapy and relevant structural and process variables have to be kept in mind when allocating patients to a program as provided by a hospital or a rehabilitation clinic. The aim of this article is to present the framework structures of both treatment levels with respect to the implementation of multimodal pain therapy programs and to elucidate the differential diagnostic approach to the indications.

[Psychological approaches to pain in Germany. Review and outlook]

Pain perception is a complex experience that entails somatic and psychological factors. This is especially true for chronic pain where increasing chronicity leads to a growing significance of psychological factors such as learning and memory processes or cognitive evaluation at the expense of nociceptive processes. Hardly any other area of health-related research and health care has such an interdisciplinary organization of research, treatment, and education. Psychological pain research and psychological treatment of pain have become specializations in their own right. For the future of this research area, a differential analysis of the contribution of psychological factors to chronicity is important. For a mechanism-oriented treatment, the development of new treatment approaches and the analysis of specific subgroups for a better differential indication of treatments is needed.

[Multimodal pain therapy. Current situation]

A multidisciplinary approach for the management of patients with chronic pain is now well-established in many countries, especially in situations involving a complex disease process in the sense of a biopsychosocial model. Both the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary pain treatment programs and their superiority compared to unimodal therapy has been documented in a number of studies, reviews and meta-analyses, in particular for patients suffering from chronic low back pain. Nevertheless, there are still major shortcomings concerning the definition of multimodal and multidisciplinary treatment and the quality of structures and processes, compared for example to the standards defined by the German Pain Society (Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft). Furthermore, there is still no consensus on specific therapeutic approaches, the differentiation between responders and non-responders as well as on the tools required for measurement. All these questions will have to be answered by concerted efforts in a multicenter setting.

[Interventions on the intervertebral discs. Indications, techniques and evidence levels]

CLINICAL ISSUE

Over the last decades a number of different minimally invasive interventions have been proposed for the treatment of intervertebral disc herniation and degeneration. All of these interventions aim at relieving pressure from compressed nerve roots by mechanical ablation, chemical dissolution, evaporation or coagulation of disc tissue.

STANDARD TREATMENT

Microsurgical sequestrectomy with direct visualization of the spinal canal.

TREATMENT INNOVATIONS

Minimally invasive intradiscal interventions, such as chemonucleolysis, manual and automated disc decompression, laser disc decompression, nucleoplasty and thermal anular radiofrequency (RF) techniques with posterolateral access to the intervertebral disc.

PERFORMANCE

The effectiveness and safety of the different minimally invasive procedures are compared to the standard surgical procedure on the basis of a literature review.

ACHIEVEMENTS

For patients with disc herniation requiring surgery, microsurgical sequestrectomy is the treatment of choice, while discectomy is obsolete. Intradiscal procedures have a low level of evidence while long-term results are still lacking. Randomized controlled trials are required to generate evidence-based results.

PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Indications for treatment should be established by an interdisciplinary team with the choice of treatment depending on the interventionalist's expertise and skills. In carefully selected patients scheduled for elective treatment, the different minimally invasive procedures allow adequate treatment when performed by an experienced interventionalist.