AANS: Spinal Cord Stimulation More Cost-effective than Conventional Pain Therapy for Failed-Back Syndrome
Unregistered User
If this is not your name, click here.
Contact Us | Order Now | Journals | Bookstore | Register a colleague
 
  SEARCH  
News
Bookstore
Medline
The Web
Meetings & Congresses
Complete Doctor's Guide
 


 EXPLORE :
 news  All News
 webcasts All Webcasts
 All cases All Cases
 Meetings All Meetings & Congresses
 Medical All Medical Resources

top





New drugs / indications

English Dictionary

Medical Dictionary

Thesaurus



Warning | Privacy | Awards



 Favourite Journals 

Click here to choose your favourite journals


 Favourite Sites 

Click here to choose your favourite sites


 Languages 



  




AANS: Spinal Cord Stimulation More Cost-effective than Conventional Pain Therapy for Failed-Back Syndrome

By W. A. Thomasson
Special to DG News

CHICAGO, IL -- April 9, 2002 -- Over a five-year period, the chronic pain of failed-back syndrome can be relieved more effectively and at lower cost using electrical stimulation of the spinal cord (SCS) than by conventional pain therapy, according to a study presented here yesterday at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS).

Krishna Kumar, MD, of the University of Saskatchewan, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada, said that in contrast to most previous attempts to address this question, this study was based on the actual treatment experiences of 104 patients followed for five years.

At entry, patients had had a median of 3.3 operations and had been out of work for at least one year.

Sixty of the patients had electrodes implanted for SCS while the remaining 44 were treated conservatively with conventional pain therapy. SCS provided somewhat superior pain control and improved quality of life; no patient required hospitalization for breakthrough pain, versus an average of three days hospitalization in patients treated conventionally. Fifteen percent were able to return to work.

Analysis showed that the total five-year cost of SCS was C$28,665, while that of conventional therapy was C$38,029. The cost of SCS was initially higher, due to the expenses associated with surgical implantation of the electrodes, but by the end of 2.5 years this had been more than offset by the lower cost of drugs and fewer contacts with physicians and other healthcare professionals. The cost advantage of SCS continued throughout the remainder of the five years, despite most patients having to have their electrodes replaced at some point.

Dr. Kumar noted that projections suggest the advantage would be still greater at 10 years, and that results would be even better if manufacturers could reduce the cost of the SCS equipment and/or make the electrodes more durable.

E-mail this page
to a friend or colleague!
To print,
use this version




Any question regarding a medical diagnosis, treatment, referral, drug availability or pricing should be directed to either a licensed physician or to the product's manufacturer.

If you have any technical questions or other concerns about this site, feel free to contact us at webmaster@docguide.com.

All contents Copyright (c) 1995- Doctor's Guide Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.


Employment opportunities | Partnering opportunities