Cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin type a in the treatment of post-stroke spasticity
Anthony Ward A1, Graeme Roberts A2, Juliet Warner A3, Samantha Gillard A3
A1 North Staffordshire Rehabilitation Unit, The Hayward, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire
A2 Allergan Ltd, Buckinghamshire
A3 Abacus International, Bicester, Oxfordshire, UK
Objective: Treatment strategies for post-stroke spasticity include oral anti-spastic drugs, surgery, physiotherapy and botulinum toxin type A injection. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness and outcomes of oral therapy vs. botulinum toxin type A treatment strategies in patients with flexed wrist/clenched fist spasticity.Methods: Treatment outcome and resource use data were collected from an expert panel experienced in the treatment of post-stroke spasticity. A decision tree model was developed to analyse the data.Results: Thirty-five percent of patients receiving oral therapy showed an improvement in pre-treatment functional targets which would warrant continuation of therapy, compared with 73% and 68% of patients treated with botulinum toxin type A first- and second-line therapy, respectively. Botulinum toxin type A treatment was also more cost-effective than oral therapy with the “cost-per-successfully-treated month” being £942, £1387 and £1697 for botulinum toxin type A first-line, botulinum toxin type A second-line and oral therapy, respectively.Conclusion: In conclusion, botulinum toxin type A is a cost-effective treatment for post-stroke spasticity.
Do you want to comment on this paper? The comments will show up here and if appropriate the comments will also separately be forwarded to the authors.
You need to login/create an account to comment on articles. Click here to login/create an account