Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of treatment strategies without opioid medications (nonopioid treatment strategy) versus strategies with opioid medications (opioid treatment strategy) among surgery-eligible patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip in Japan.
Materials and MethodsWe built a Markov cohort model to evaluate outcomes for the treatment strategies in surgery-eligible patients aged ≥ 65 years with OA of the knee or hip in Japan. The opioid treatment strategy as an intervention includes a health state with opioid medication in the treatment pathway. On the other hand, for the non-opioid treatment strategy, there is no health state with opioid medication. A targeted literature review and database analysis were conducted to identify and define the values of the variables included in the model. The time horizon was set to 30 years, and a 2% discount was applied for cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis were performed in the model. The outcomes were QALYs and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results In the base-case analysis, the non-opioid treatment strategy was dominant over the opioid treatment strategy and associated with an incremental cost and QALYs of − 53,878 JPY (− 499 USD) and 0.03 QALYs, respectively, in patients with knee OA, and − 54,129 JPY (− 502 USD) and 0.02 QALYs, respectively, in patients with hip OA. One-way sensitivity analysis showed the ICER was most sensitive to the QALY for opioid monotherapy. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed a high degree of uncertainty associated with the results. Limitations Study limitations included assumptions related to transition probabilities of the health states, and a lack of Japanese-specific data for transition probabilities, incidence of adverse events and utility values. Conclusions This study suggests that the non-opioid treatment strategy is cost effective compared with the opioid treatment strategy in the management of surgery-eligible patients with OA of the knee or hip. However, this final conclusion may not be accurate as the methodology is heavily reliant on assumptions.