Cost analysis applied to postoperative analgesia regimens: a comparison between parecoxib and propacetamol

The cost-effectiveness analysis of analgesic treatment options for postoperative pain following laparotomy surgeries

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain control remains unsatisfactory. Patients who underwent laparotomy may have moderate to severe acute postoperative pain. Comparative cost-effectiveness of the following postoperative pain treatment options remains to be investigated: patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) with flurbiprofen therapy, flurbiprofen monotherapy, parecoxib monotherapy, or dezocine monotherapy.

AIM

To provide a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of four analgesic regimens for patients with postoperative pain following laparotomy surgeries.

METHOD

Patients with postoperative pain following laparotomy were retrospectively reviewed from a postoperative pain management database created by pharmacists, and divided into four groups according to analgesic regimens. The clinical outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and the incidence of adverse drug events. The CEA was conducted by developing a decision tree model based on retrospective data. The maximum incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the four regimens was used as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) value. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of the base-case results was examined by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 677 patients were included in the retrospective study. PCIA with flurbiprofen therapy had the lowest VAS scores at 6, 24, 48 h postoperatively. Based on the base-case results, PCIA plus flurbiprofen was the optimal regimen with the highest effectiveness, while flurbiprofen monotherapy had the lowest cost. PCIA plus flurbiprofen was the optimal regimen even with a WTP value of 0 dollars.

CONCLUSION

PCIA plus flurbiprofen therapy was the optimal regimen. Parecoxib monotherapy was more cost-effective than flurbiprofen monotherapy. The findings may guide the selection of postoperative pain management.

Economic assessment of postoperative pain control strategies for treatment of adult patients with cancer

OBJECTIVE

The authors performed an economic assessment of opioids currently being used for control of postoperative pain relating to the surgical treatment of cancer (fentanyl and sufentanil) within the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS, in the Portuguese acronym).

METHOD

The assessment was based on the perspective of the government, in order to collaborate with the promotion of effectiveness in public policies of health, and to optimize the allocation of public resources into health. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using data collected from the Brazilian Unified Health System and information from literature review, in order to build a decision tree on the alternatives for control of postoperative pain related to cancer treatment among adult patients. The outcomes considered were: effectiveness of postoperative analgesia and occurrence of nausea and vomit in the 48 hour period after surgery, and additional 24-hour cycles in patient follow-up. A univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted in order to verify robustness of the model estimated.

RESULTS

Literature review showed a limited number of studies directly comparing fentanyl and sufentanil for control of postoperative pain. The adoption of sufentanil (cost = U$ 25.72 / outcome = 1.6 VAS points) was dominant in relation to the use of fentanyl (cost = U$ 32.58 / outcome = 2.6 VAS points). The estimated model showed robustness in relation to changes in the parameters analyzed.

CONCLUSION

Sufentanil presented higher cost-effectiveness ratio in relation to fentanyl for control of postoperative pain in surgeries related to cancer treatment among adult patients in the Brazilian Unified Health System.

Efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous dose of parecoxib for postoperative pain control after elective cesarean delivery: A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous (i.v.) dose of parecoxib as an adjunctive analgesia to intrathecal morphine after elective cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

A total of 82 low-risk term pregnant women who were scheduled for elective CD during the June 2014-June 2015 study period were enrolled. Two hours after surgery, subjects were randomly assigned to receive either i.v. injection of 2 mL (40 mg) parecoxib (study group; n = 41) or 2 mL normal saline solution (control group; n = 41). Patient randomization into groups was determined by the hospital's central computer system. Outcome measurements included total postoperative supplemental meperidine consumption, recorded pain score by numeric pain rating scale at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h, postoperatively, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were comparable between groups. Total postoperative meperidine consumption was not significantly different between groups (12.7 ± 18.8 mg vs 8.3 ± 16.7 mg; P > 0.05). Compared with control, the study group was significantly less likely to experience moderate to severe postoperative pain (score ≥ 4) at 6 h (0% vs 21.9%; P = 0.002). Study group patients reported higher satisfaction than control group patients (median score: 8 vs 6; P < 0.01). No patients in either group reported adverse effects from their assigned intervention.

CONCLUSION

Parecoxib did not demonstrate effectiveness in reducing patient requirement for supplementary meperidine after CD. However, administration of a single 40-mg dose of i.v. parecoxib after elective CD demonstrated effectiveness in reducing pain scores, with a resulting increase in patient satisfaction.

Postoperative analgesia with parecoxib, acetaminophen, and the combination of both: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients undergoing thyroid surgery

BACKGROUND

We assessed the analgesic efficacy of parecoxib, acetaminophen, and the combination of both compared with placebo in patients undergoing elective thyroid or parathyroid surgery.

METHODS

We randomized 140 patients to receive one of the following i.v. treatments using a double-blinded double-dummy technique: placebo, 80 mg 24 h(-1) parecoxib, 5 g 24 h(-1) acetaminophen, or 80 mg parecoxib plus 5 g acetaminophen. We provided rescue analgesia with piritramide delivered by a patient-controlled analgesia device. We measured opioid consumption and pain intensity over 24 h after operation.

RESULTS

Patient characteristic data, anaesthetic, and surgical characteristics of the patients in the four groups were similar. Parecoxib, acetaminophen, and the combination significantly reduced opioid requirements during 24 h after surgery [mean (sd) 12.5 (10.9) mg for parecoxib, 14.2 (12.3) mg for acetaminophen, and 11.9 (10.7) mg for combination] compared with placebo [23.5 (15.3) mg, P<0.05]. However, the combination of parecoxib and acetaminophen did not have any advantage over individual drugs in terms of opioid consumption in our trial (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Parecoxib and acetaminophen effectively reduce postoperative opioid requirements after thyroid or parathyroid surgery. The combination of these drugs is not associated with a further reduction in opioid consumption.

Comparison of parecoxib and proparacetamol in endoscopic nasal surgery patients

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of parecoxib for postoperative analgesia after endoscopic turbinate and sinus surgery with the prodrug of acetaminophen, proparacetamol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status I-II patients, receiving functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and endoscopic turbinectomy, were investigated in a prospective, randomized, double-blind manner. After local infiltration with 1% mepivacaine, patients were randomly allocated to receive intravenous (i.v.) administration of either 40 mg of parecoxib (n=25) or 2 g of proparacetamol (n=25) 15 min before discontinuation of total i.v. anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. A blinded observer recorded the incidence and severity of pain at admission to the post anaesthesia care unit (PACU) at 10, 20, and 30 min after PACU admission, and every 1 h thereafter for the first 6 postoperative h.

RESULTS

The area under the curve of VAS (AUC(VAS)) calculated during the study period was 669 (28-1901) cm x min in the proparacetamol group and 635 (26-1413) cm x min in the parecoxib group (p=0.34). Rescue morphine analgesia was required by 14 patients (56%) in the proparacetamol group and 12 patients (48%) in the parecoxib (p >or= 0.05), while mean morphine consumption was 5-3.5mg and 5-2.0 mg in the proparacetamol groups and parecoxib, respectively (p >or= 0.05). No differences in the incidence of side effects were recorded between the 2 groups. Patient satisfaction was similarly high in both groups, and all patients were uneventfully discharged 24 h after surgery.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing endoscopic nasal surgery, prior infiltration with local anaesthetics, parecoxib administered before discontinuing general anaesthetic, is not superior to proparacetamol in treating early postoperative pain.