IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1777-d498107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness of Two Dry Needling Interventions for Plantar Heel Pain: A Secondary Analysis of an RCT

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Fernández

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad San Jorge, Campus Universitario, Autov. A23 km 299, Villanueva de Gállego, 50830 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Zaid Al-Boloushi

    (Ministry of Health, State of Kuwait, Jamal Abdulnasser Street, Al Solaibeykhat Area 5, Safat, Kuwait City 13001, Kuwait
    Physiatry and Nursing Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, Zaragoza University, C/Domingo Miral s/n, CP 50009 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Pablo Bellosta-López

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad San Jorge, Campus Universitario, Autov. A23 km 299, Villanueva de Gállego, 50830 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Pablo Herrero

    (Physiatry and Nursing Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, Zaragoza University, C/Domingo Miral s/n, CP 50009 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Manuel Gómez

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad San Jorge, Campus Universitario, Autov. A23 km 299, Villanueva de Gállego, 50830 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Sandra Calvo

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad San Jorge, Campus Universitario, Autov. A23 km 299, Villanueva de Gállego, 50830 Zaragoza, Spain)

Abstract

Plantar heel pain is a common cause of foot pain that affects patients’ quality of life and represents a significant cost for the healthcare system. Dry needling and percutaneous needle electrolysis are two minimally invasive treatments that were shown to be effective for the management of plantar heel pain. The aim of our study was to compare these two treatments in terms of health and economic consequences based on the results of a published randomized controlled trial. For this, we evaluated the costs from the point of view of the hospital and we carried out a cost-effectiveness study using quality of life as the main variable according to the Eq-5D-5L questionnaire. The cost of the complete treatment with dry needling (DN) was €178.86, while the percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) was €200.90. The quality of life of patients improved and was translated into +0.615 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for DN and +0.669 for PNE. PNE presented an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €411.34/QALY against DN. These results indicate that PNE had a better cost-effectiveness ratio for the treatment of plantar heel pain than DN.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Fernández & Zaid Al-Boloushi & Pablo Bellosta-López & Pablo Herrero & Manuel Gómez & Sandra Calvo, 2021. "Cost-Effectiveness of Two Dry Needling Interventions for Plantar Heel Pain: A Secondary Analysis of an RCT," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-9, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1777-:d:498107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1777/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1777/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard M. Nixon & David Wonderling & Richard D. Grieve, 2010. "Non‐parametric methods for cost‐effectiveness analysis: the central limit theorem and the bootstrap compared," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 316-333, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Janet MacNeil Vroomen & Iris Eekhout & Marcel G. Dijkgraaf & Hein van Hout & Sophia E. de Rooij & Martijn W. Heymans & Judith E. Bosmans, 2016. "Multiple imputation strategies for zero-inflated cost data in economic evaluations: which method works best?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(8), pages 939-950, November.
    2. Bebu, Ionut & Luta, George & Mathew, Thomas & Kennedy, Paul A. & Agan, Brian K., 2016. "Parametric cost-effectiveness inference with skewed data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 210-220.
    3. Theodoros Mantopoulos & Paul M. Mitchell & Nicky J. Welton & Richard McManus & Lazaros Andronis, 2016. "Choice of statistical model for cost-effectiveness analysis and covariate adjustment: empirical application of prominent models and assessment of their results," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(8), pages 927-938, November.
    4. Edmond S.-W. Ng & Richard Grieve & James R. Carpenter, 2013. "Two-stage nonparametric bootstrap sampling with shrinkage correction for clustered data," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(1), pages 141-164, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1777-:d:498107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.