Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32970236›Full record

Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021

Healthcare expenditure and its predictors in a cohort of Australians living with sciatica.

Alexander Chye, Chung-Wei Christine Lin, Mark J Hancock, Ian Harris, Jane Latimer, Christopher G Maher, Andrew J McLachlan, Stephanie Mathieson, Bart Koes, Richard O Day and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 79% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Alexander ChyeThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5, 1 King Street, Newtown, Sydney, 2041, Australia. achye@georgeinstitute.org.au.ORCID 0000-0001-8379-371X
Chung-Wei Christine LinThe Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6192-7238
Mark J HancockFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9277-5377
Ian HarrisSouth Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0887-7627
Jane LatimerThe Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, Australia.
Christopher G MaherThe Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1628-7857
Andrew J McLachlanSydney Pharmacy School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4674-0242
Stephanie MathiesonThe Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7335-8842
Bart KoesDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0450-9969
Richard O DaySt Vincent's Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6045-6937
Laurent BillotThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5, 1 King Street, Newtown, Sydney, 2041, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4975-9793
Stephen JanThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5, 1 King Street, Newtown, Sydney, 2041, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2839-1405
Blake AngellThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5, 1 King Street, Newtown, Sydney, 2041, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7188-7740
UNSW Sydney · AUThe University of Sydney · AUMacquarie University · AUUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo estimate the healthcare resource utilisation of an Australian cohort of people with sciatica and explore individual-level factors associated with expenditure.

methodsHealthcare utilisation (services and medication) data from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pregabalin in patients with sciatica (n = 185) were analysed to estimate healthcare expenditure of participants over 12 months. Associations between key baseline socio-economic, pain and quality of life characteristics and healthcare expenditure were examined using generalised linear imputation models.

resultsOn average, participants accessed AUD$1,134 of healthcare over the year, predominantly made up of $114 of medication and $914 of health services, which included $418 of physiotherapy services. Participants randomised to receive pregabalin incurred higher expenditure ($1,263 compared to $1,001 for placebo), which was largely driven by pregabalin ($158) and greater health services ($107). Healthcare expenditure was significantly higher for participants prescribed pregabalin, earning greater than $1,700 per week ($88,400 per year) and reporting poorer quality of life (physical and mental).

conclusionOur results suggest inefficiency in the use of healthcare resources due to increased healthcare resource utilisation in people with sciatica treated with pregabalin, compared to placebo. Costs of treating sciatica varied based on individual quality of life and socio-economic characteristics.

Indexed as

SciaticaAustraliaHealth ExpendituresHumansPregabalinQuality of LifePregabalinCost predictorsHealthcare expenditureHealthcare utilisationPregabalinSciatica

Identifiers

PMID32970236
OpenAlexW3088760610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.