The cost-effectiveness of epidural, patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, or transversus abdominis plane infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative pain management

Rovnat Babazade, Wael Saasouh, Amanda J. Naylor, Natalya Makarova, Chiedozie I. Udeh, Alparslan Turan, Belinda L. Udeh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Study objective: Intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (IVPCA), epidural analgesia and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) infiltrations are frequently used postoperative pain management modalities. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively in patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. Design: Retrospective cost effectiveness analysis. Setting: Operating room. Patients: We obtained data on major lower-abdominal surgeries performed under general anesthesia on adult patients between January 2012 and July 2014. Interventions: A cost-effectiveness analysis was comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively. Measurements: A decision analytic model was used to estimate the health outcomes for patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was time-weighted pain from 0 to 72 h after surgery, as measured by numerical rating scale pain scores. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the hospital as the party responsible for most costs related to surgery. Main results: From the base case analysis, IVPCA was the optimal strategy regarding cost and effect. TAP with LB, however, was only narrowly dominated, while epidural was clearly dominated. From the sensitivity analysis at willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $150, IV PCA and TAP infiltration were each the optimal strategy for approximately 50% of the iterations. At WTP of $10,000, epidural was only the optimal strategy in 10% of the iterations. Conclusions: This is the first study in the literature to compare the cost-effectiveness of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with LB. Within reasonable WTP values, there is little differentiation in cost-effectiveness between IVPCA and TAP infiltration with LB. Epidural does not become a cost-effective strategy even at much higher WTP values.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages56-63
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Clinical Anesthesia
Volume53
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2019

Fingerprint

Abdominal Muscles
Bupivacaine
Patient-Controlled Analgesia
Pain Management
Postoperative Pain
Analgesia
Opioid Analgesics
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Pain
Passive Cutaneous Anaphylaxis
Epidural Analgesia
Operating Rooms
General Anesthesia
Health

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • Epidural analgesia
  • Nerve block
  • Pain

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

The cost-effectiveness of epidural, patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, or transversus abdominis plane infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative pain management. / Babazade, Rovnat; Saasouh, Wael; Naylor, Amanda J.; Makarova, Natalya; Udeh, Chiedozie I.; Turan, Alparslan; Udeh, Belinda L.

In: Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, Vol. 53, 01.03.2019, p. 56-63.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{218094a5ccf64875a5c01fb11e0b2c88,
title = "The cost-effectiveness of epidural, patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, or transversus abdominis plane infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative pain management",
abstract = "Study objective: Intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (IVPCA), epidural analgesia and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) infiltrations are frequently used postoperative pain management modalities. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively in patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. Design: Retrospective cost effectiveness analysis. Setting: Operating room. Patients: We obtained data on major lower-abdominal surgeries performed under general anesthesia on adult patients between January 2012 and July 2014. Interventions: A cost-effectiveness analysis was comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively. Measurements: A decision analytic model was used to estimate the health outcomes for patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was time-weighted pain from 0 to 72 h after surgery, as measured by numerical rating scale pain scores. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the hospital as the party responsible for most costs related to surgery. Main results: From the base case analysis, IVPCA was the optimal strategy regarding cost and effect. TAP with LB, however, was only narrowly dominated, while epidural was clearly dominated. From the sensitivity analysis at willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $150, IV PCA and TAP infiltration were each the optimal strategy for approximately 50{\%} of the iterations. At WTP of $10,000, epidural was only the optimal strategy in 10{\%} of the iterations. Conclusions: This is the first study in the literature to compare the cost-effectiveness of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with LB. Within reasonable WTP values, there is little differentiation in cost-effectiveness between IVPCA and TAP infiltration with LB. Epidural does not become a cost-effective strategy even at much higher WTP values.",
keywords = "Cost-effectiveness analysis, Epidural analgesia, Nerve block, Pain",
author = "Rovnat Babazade and Wael Saasouh and Naylor, {Amanda J.} and Natalya Makarova and Udeh, {Chiedozie I.} and Alparslan Turan and Udeh, {Belinda L.}",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.10.003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "56--63",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Anesthesia",
issn = "0952-8180",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cost-effectiveness of epidural, patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, or transversus abdominis plane infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative pain management

AU - Babazade, Rovnat

AU - Saasouh, Wael

AU - Naylor, Amanda J.

AU - Makarova, Natalya

AU - Udeh, Chiedozie I.

AU - Turan, Alparslan

AU - Udeh, Belinda L.

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Study objective: Intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (IVPCA), epidural analgesia and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) infiltrations are frequently used postoperative pain management modalities. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively in patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. Design: Retrospective cost effectiveness analysis. Setting: Operating room. Patients: We obtained data on major lower-abdominal surgeries performed under general anesthesia on adult patients between January 2012 and July 2014. Interventions: A cost-effectiveness analysis was comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively. Measurements: A decision analytic model was used to estimate the health outcomes for patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was time-weighted pain from 0 to 72 h after surgery, as measured by numerical rating scale pain scores. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the hospital as the party responsible for most costs related to surgery. Main results: From the base case analysis, IVPCA was the optimal strategy regarding cost and effect. TAP with LB, however, was only narrowly dominated, while epidural was clearly dominated. From the sensitivity analysis at willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $150, IV PCA and TAP infiltration were each the optimal strategy for approximately 50% of the iterations. At WTP of $10,000, epidural was only the optimal strategy in 10% of the iterations. Conclusions: This is the first study in the literature to compare the cost-effectiveness of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with LB. Within reasonable WTP values, there is little differentiation in cost-effectiveness between IVPCA and TAP infiltration with LB. Epidural does not become a cost-effective strategy even at much higher WTP values.

AB - Study objective: Intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (IVPCA), epidural analgesia and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) infiltrations are frequently used postoperative pain management modalities. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively in patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. Design: Retrospective cost effectiveness analysis. Setting: Operating room. Patients: We obtained data on major lower-abdominal surgeries performed under general anesthesia on adult patients between January 2012 and July 2014. Interventions: A cost-effectiveness analysis was comparing the use of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia in the first 72 h postoperatively. Measurements: A decision analytic model was used to estimate the health outcomes for patients undergoing major lower abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was time-weighted pain from 0 to 72 h after surgery, as measured by numerical rating scale pain scores. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the hospital as the party responsible for most costs related to surgery. Main results: From the base case analysis, IVPCA was the optimal strategy regarding cost and effect. TAP with LB, however, was only narrowly dominated, while epidural was clearly dominated. From the sensitivity analysis at willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $150, IV PCA and TAP infiltration were each the optimal strategy for approximately 50% of the iterations. At WTP of $10,000, epidural was only the optimal strategy in 10% of the iterations. Conclusions: This is the first study in the literature to compare the cost-effectiveness of epidural, IVPCA, and TAP infiltrations with LB. Within reasonable WTP values, there is little differentiation in cost-effectiveness between IVPCA and TAP infiltration with LB. Epidural does not become a cost-effective strategy even at much higher WTP values.

KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - Epidural analgesia

KW - Nerve block

KW - Pain

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054708704&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054708704&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.10.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.10.003

M3 - Article

VL - 53

SP - 56

EP - 63

JO - Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

T2 - Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

JF - Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

SN - 0952-8180

ER -