This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin treatment for neuropathic pain.
Design:Long-term simulations based on state transition models.
Methods:We examined the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin for treatment of three common peripheral neuropathic pains, postherpetic neuralgia(PHN), painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy(DPN), and radiculopathy, using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER). We used quality-adjusted life years(QALYs)as an index of effectiveness, and also estimated medical costs. For PHN and DPN, we constructed state transition models comprising two states, with and without pregabalin treatment, and performed 52-week simulations. The pain scores reported in Japanese phaseIII studies were used to set patients' weekly pain scores. The results of utility surveys conducted overseas were used as utility scores, while values randomly sampled from probability distributions were used to set weekly pain scores and drop-out rates. In base-case analyses, we performed 1000 1st-order Monte Carlo simulations using 1000 values randomly sampled from probability distributions, and calculated QALYs and medical costs for 52 weeks for each group. For radiculopathy, the ICER was calculated from changes in QALYs for 12 weeks reported overseas and medical costs estimated separately for the identical period.
Results:The ICERs for PHN, DPN, and radiculopathy were 1,116,886 Yen/QALY, 1,100,420 Yen/QALY, and 1,095,943 Yen/QALY, respectively, which were well below the upper limits of ICER ranges for treatments considered cost-effective. There were no cases in which ICERs obtained from scenario and sensitivity analyses differed significantly.
Conclusion:Pregabalin was shown to be cost-effective treatment for neuropathic pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Case series. PURPOSE: To determine the utility of "PainVision" apparatus for the assessment of low back pain. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: A newly developed device, the PainVision PS-2100 (Nipro, Osaka, Japan), has been used to assess the perception of pain in a quantitative manner. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PainVision for the assessment of low back pain. METHODS: We assessed 89 patients with low back pain. The numeric rating scale (NRS) score, McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) score and the degree of pain calculated by PainVision were measured twice at 4-week intervals in each patient. An electrode was patched on the forearm surface of the patients and the degree of pain was automatically calculated (degree of pain=100x[current producing pain comparable with low back pain-current at perception threshold/current at perception threshold]). Correlations between NRS and MPQ scores and the degree of pain were determined using Spearman's rank correlation test. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation between the NRS and MPQ scores at each time point (rs =0.60, p<0.0001). The degree of pain also showed a moderate correlation with NRS and MPQ scores at each time point (rs =0.40, p<0.03). The change in the degree of pain over 4 weeks showed a moderate correlation with changes in the NRS and MPQ scores (rs =0.40, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PainVision as self-reported questionnaires is a useful tool to assess low back pain.
Electrodes ; Forearm ; Humans ; Low Back Pain* ; Pain Measurement ; Surveys and Questionnaires