Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacral neuromodulation for faecal incontinence in The Netherlands

Strategies used for childhood chronic functional constipation: the SUCCESS evidence synthesis

Background

Up to 30% of children have constipation at some stage in their life. Although often short-lived, in one-third of children it progresses to chronic functional constipation, potentially with overflow incontinence. Optimal management strategies remain unclear.

Objective

To determine the most effective interventions, and combinations and sequences of interventions, for childhood chronic functional constipation, and understand how they can best be implemented.

Methods

Key stakeholders, comprising two parents of children with chronic functional constipation, two adults who experienced childhood chronic functional constipation and four health professional/continence experts, contributed throughout the research. We conducted pragmatic mixed-method reviews. For all reviews, included studies focused on any interventions/strategies, delivered in any setting, to improve any outcomes in children (0-18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of chronic functional constipation (excluding studies of diagnosis/assessment) included. Dual reviewers applied inclusion criteria and assessed risk of bias. One reviewer extracted data, checked by a second reviewer. Scoping review: We systematically searched electronic databases (including Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) (January 2011 to March 2020) and grey literature, including studies (any design) reporting any intervention/strategy. Data were coded, tabulated and mapped. Research quality was not evaluated. Systematic reviews of the evidence of effectiveness: For each different intervention, we included existing systematic reviews judged to be low risk of bias (using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews), updating any meta-analyses with new randomised controlled trials. Where there was no existing low risk of bias systematic reviews, we included randomised controlled trials and other primary studies. The risk of bias was judged using design-specific tools. Evidence was synthesised narratively, and a process of considered judgement was used to judge certainty in the evidence as high, moderate, low, very low or insufficient evidence. Economic synthesis: Included studies (any design, English-language) detailed intervention-related costs. Studies were categorised as cost-consequence, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility or cost-benefit, and reporting quality evaluated using the consensus health economic criteria checklist. Systematic review of implementation factors: Included studies reported data relating to implementation barriers or facilitators. Using a best-fit framework synthesis approach, factors were synthesised around the consolidated framework for implementation research domains.

Results

Stakeholders prioritised outcomes, developed a model which informed evidence synthesis and identified evidence gaps.

Scoping review

651 studies, including 190 randomised controlled trials and 236 primary studies, conservatively reported 48 interventions/intervention combinations.

Effectiveness systematic reviews

studies explored service delivery models (n = 15); interventions delivered by families/carers (n = 32), wider children's workforce (n = 21), continence teams (n = 31) and specialist consultant-led teams (n = 42); complementary therapies (n = 15); and psychosocial interventions (n = 4). One intervention (probiotics) had moderate-quality evidence; all others had low to very-low-quality evidence. Thirty-one studies reported evidence relating to cost or resource use; data were insufficient to support generalisable conclusions. One hundred and six studies described implementation barriers and facilitators.

Conclusions

Management of childhood chronic functional constipation is complex. The available evidence remains limited, with small, poorly conducted and reported studies. Many evidence gaps were identified. Treatment recommendations within current clinical guidelines remain largely unchanged, but there is a need for research to move away from considering effectiveness of single interventions. Clinical care and future studies must consider the individual characteristics of children.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019159008.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 128470) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 5. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Normal Workflow and Key Strategies for Data Cleaning Toward Real-World Data: Viewpoint

With the rapid development of science, technology, and engineering, large amounts of data have been generated in many fields in the past 20 years. In the process of medical research, data are constantly generated, and large amounts of real-world data form a "data disaster." Effective data analysis and mining are based on data availability and high data quality. The premise of high data quality is the need to clean the data. Data cleaning is the process of detecting and correcting "dirty data," which is the basis of data analysis and management. Moreover, data cleaning is a common technology for improving data quality. However, the current literature on real-world research provides little guidance on how to efficiently and ethically set up and perform data cleaning. To address this issue, we proposed a data cleaning framework for real-world research, focusing on the 3 most common types of dirty data (duplicate, missing, and outlier data), and a normal workflow for data cleaning to serve as a reference for the application of such technologies in future studies. We also provided relevant suggestions for common problems in data cleaning.

Long-term cost-effectiveness analysis of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of severe faecal incontinence

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of severe faecal incontinence as compared with symptomatic management.

METHODS

In the public health field, a micro-costing evaluation method was conducted from the perspectives of the health system and the society. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was used as a decision index, and we considered various scenarios to evaluate the impact of the cost of symptomatic management and percutaneous nerve evaluation success rate in its calculation. Clinical data were retrieved from a consecutive cohort of 93 patients with severe faecal incontinence undergoing sacral neuromodulation after a failure of conservative (pharmacological and biofeedback) and/or surgical (sphincteroplasty) first-line treatments were considered.

RESULTS

The long-term incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing sacral neuromodulation versus symptomatic management was 14347€/QALY and 28523€/QALY from the societal and health service provider's perspectives, respectively. If the definitive pulse generator implant success rate was 100%, incremental cost-effectiveness would correspond to 6831€/QALY and 16761€/QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacral neuromodulation may be considered a cost-effective technique in the long-term treatment of severe faecal incontinence from the societal and health care sector perspectives. Improving patient selection and determining the predictive outcome factors for successful sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of faecal incontinence would improve cost-effectiveness.

Comparative effectiveness of biofeedback and injectable bulking agents for treatment of fecal incontinence: Design and methods

Fecal incontinence (FI), the involuntary passage of stool, is common and can markedly impair the quality of life. Among patients who fail initial options (pads or protective devices, bowel modifying agents, and pelvic floor exercises), the options are pelvic floor biofeedback (BIO), perianal injection with bulking agents (INJ), and sacral nerve electrical stimulation (SNS), which have not been subjected to head-to-head comparisons. This study will compare the safety and efficacy of BIO and INJ for managing FI. The impact of these approaches on quality-of-life and psychological distress, cost effectiveness, and predictors of response to therapy will also be evaluated. Six centers in the United States will enroll approximately 285 patients with moderate to severe FI. Patients who have 4 or more FI episodes over 2 weeks proceed to a 4-week trial of enhanced medical management (EMM) (ie, education, bowel management, and pelvic floor exercises). Thereafter, 194 non-responders as defined by a less than 75% reduction in the frequency of FI will be randomized to BIO or INJ. Three months later, the efficacy, safety, and cost of therapy will be assessed; non-responders will be invited to choose to add the other treatment or SNS for the remainder of the study. Early EMM responders will be re-evaluated 3 months later and non-responders randomized to BIO or INJ. Standardized, and where appropriate validated approaches will be used for study procedures, which will be performed by trained personnel. Prospectively collected data on care costs and resource utilization will be used for cost effectiveness analyses.

Sacral nerve stimulation versus the magnetic sphincter augmentation device for adult faecal incontinence: the SaFaRI RCT

BACKGROUND

Preliminary studies using the FENIX™ (Torax Medical, Minneapolis, MN, USA) magnetic sphincter augmentation device suggest that it is safe to use for the treatment of adult faecal incontinence, but efficacy data are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare FENIX with sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of adult faecal incontinence in terms of safety, efficacy, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Multicentre, parallel-group, unblinded, randomised trial comparing FENIX with sacral nerve stimulation in participants suffering moderate to severe faecal incontinence.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised on an equal basis to either sacral nerve stimulation or FENIX. Follow-up occurred 2 weeks postoperatively and at 6, 12 and 18 months post randomisation.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE

The primary outcome was success, defined as device in use and ≥ 50% improvement in Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score at 18 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes included complication rates, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Between 30 October 2014 and 23 March 2017, 99 participants were randomised across 18 NHS sites (50 participants to FENIX vs. 49 participants to sacral nerve stimulation). The median time from randomisation to FENIX implantation was 57.0 days (range 4.0-416.0 days), and the median time from randomisation to permanent sacral nerve stimulation was 371.0 days (range 86.0-918.0 days). A total of 45 out of 50 participants underwent FENIX implantation and 29 out of 49 participants continued to permanent sacral nerve stimulation. The following results are reported, excluding participants for whom the corresponding outcome was not evaluable. Overall, there was success for 10 out of 80 (12.5%) participants, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups [FENIX 6/41 (14.6%) participants vs. sacral nerve stimulation 4/39 (10.3%) participants]. At least one postoperative complication was experienced by 33 out of 45 (73.3%) participants in the FENIX group and 9 out of 40 (22.5%) participants in the sacral nerve stimulation group. A total of 15 out of 50 (30%) participants in the FENIX group ultimately had to have their device explanted. Slightly higher costs and quality-adjusted life-years (incremental = £305.50 and 0.005, respectively) were observed in the FENIX group than in the sacral nerve stimulation group. This was reversed over the lifetime horizon (incremental = -£1306 and -0.23 for costs and quality-adjusted life-years, respectively), when sacral nerve stimulation was the optimal option (net monetary benefit = -£3283), with only a 45% chance of FENIX being cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

The SaFaRI study was terminated in 2017, having recruited 99 participants of the target sample size of 350 participants. The study is, therefore, substantially underpowered to detect differences between the treatment groups, with significant uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The SaFaRI study revealed inefficiencies in the treatment pathways for faecal incontinence, particularly for sacral nerve stimulation. The success of both FENIX and sacral nerve stimulation was much lower than previously reported, with high postoperative morbidity in the FENIX group.

FUTURE WORK

Further research is needed to clarify the treatment pathways for sacral nerve stimulation and to determine its true clinical and cost-effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16077538.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cost-effectiveness of sacral nerve stimulation and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous sacral nerve stimulation is recommended by the United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as a second-line treatment for patients with faecal incontinence who failed conservative therapy. Sacral nerve stimulation is an invasive procedure associated with complications and reoperations. This study aimed to investigate whether delivering less invasive and less costly percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation prior to sacral nerve stimulation is cost-effective.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation with subsequent subcutaneous sacral nerve stimulation versus subcutaneous sacral nerve stimulation alone. The model was populated with effectiveness data from systematic reviews and cost data from randomized studies comparing both procedures in a UK National Health Service (NHS) setting.

RESULTS

Offering percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation prior to sacral nerve stimulation (compared with delivering sacral nerve stimulation straight away) was both more effective and less costly in all modeled scenarios. The estimated savings from offering percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation first were £662-£5,697 per patient. The probability of this strategy being cost-effective was around 80% at £20,000-£30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

CONCLUSION

Our analyses suggest that offering patients percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation prior to sacral nerve stimulation can be both cost-effective and cost-saving in the treatment of faecal incontinence.

Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence and constipation: a European consensus statement

AIM

In Europe during the last decade sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) or sacral neuromodulation (SNM) has been used to treat faecal incontinence (FI) and constipation. Despite this, there is little consensus on baseline investigations, patient selection and operative technique. A modified Delphi process was conducted to seek consensus on the current practice of SNS/SNM for FI and constipation.

METHOD

A systematic literature search of SNS for FI and constipation was conducted using PubMed. A set of questions derived from the search and expert opinion were answered on-line on two occasions by an international panel of specialists from Europe. A 1-day face-to-face meeting of the experts finalized the discussion.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-three articles were identified from the literature search, of which 147 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two specialists in FI and constipation from Europe participated. Agreement was achieved on 43 (86%) of 50 domains including the set-up of service, patient selection, baseline investigations, operative technique and programming of the device. The median of agreement was 95% (35-100%).

CONCLUSION

Consensus was achieved on the majority of domains of SNS/SNM for FI and constipation. This should serve as a benchmark for safe and quality practice of SNS/SNM in Europe.

Three-year cost-effectiveness model for non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid and dextranomer copolymer compared with sacral nerve stimulation after conservative therapy for the management of fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Two new therapies for fecal incontinence (FI) are now available: non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid and dextranomer copolymer (NASHA/Dx) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS).

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of NASHA/Dx compared with SNS and conservative therapy (CT) for the treatment of FI after CT failure.

METHODS

Decision tree models with Markov subbranches were developed to compare all direct costs and outcomes during a 3-year period from the viewpoint of the US third-party payer. Costs (in 2013 US dollars) of devices, medical and surgical care, and hospitalization were included. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incontinence-free days (IFDs). Both costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for each outcome. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine robustness of results and model stability. A budget impact analysis was also undertaken to estimate the potential cost and savings of NASHA/Dx for a payer with 1,000,000 covered lives.

RESULTS

For the 3-year cost-effectiveness models, the expected cost was $9053 for CT, $14,962 for NASHA/Dx, and $33,201 for SNS. The numbers of QALYs were 1.769, 1.929, and 2.004, respectively. The numbers of IFDs were 128.8, 267.6, and 514.8, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per additional IFD gained were $42.60 for NASHA/Dx vs CT, $73.76 for SNS vs NASHA/Dx, and $62.55 for SNS vs CT. The incremental costs per QALY gained were $37,036 for NASHA/Dx vs CT, $244,509 for SNS vs NASHA/Dx, and $103,066 for SNS vs CT. The budget impact analysis evaluated the financial effect on the health care system of the use of NASHA/Dx and SNS. For the scenarios evaluated, when all of the patients receive NASHA/Dx, the net annual effect to the health care payer budget ranged from $571,455 to $2,857,275. When all of the patients receive SNS, the net annual effect to the health care payer budget ranged from $1,959,323 to $9,796,613.

CONCLUSION

Both NASHA/Dx and SNS have produced significant improvements in FI symptoms for affected patients. NASHA/Dx is a cost-effective and more efficient use of resources for the treatment of FI when compared with SNS. The budget impact analysis suggests that although reimbursement for NASHA/Dx treatment initially adds costs to the health care system, it is significantly less expensive than SNS for patients who are candidates for either treatment.

Sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of refractory voiding and bowel dysfunction

Sacral nerve stimulation, sometimes referred to as a "pacemaker for the bladder and bowels" delivers nonpainful, electrical pulses to the sacral nerves to improve or restore function. A relatively simple procedure works via a complex mechanism to modulate the reflexes that influence the bladder, bowels, sphincters, and pelvic floor. Current approved indications include urinary urge incontinence, urgency-frequency, nonobstructive urinary retention, and fecal incontinence. The history, mechanism of action, evolution, and landmark literature for this treatment modality are reviewed.