Descriptive analysis of Medicaid patients with postherpetic neuralgia treated with lidocaine patch 5%

Abstract

Objectives:

To compare demographic and comorbidity profiles and healthcare costs of Medicaid patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) treated with lidocaine patch 5% (lidocaine patch) versus patients not treated with the lidocaine patch. Repeat comparison for the subset of patients treated in long-term care (LTC) settings.

Methods:

Patients, age ≥18 years, with PHN diagnosis, or PHN-likely patients with herpes zoster diagnosis and ≥30 days of PHN-recommended treatment, were identified in Medicaid claims from Florida, Iowa, Missouri, and New Jersey (1999–2007). Patients had continuous eligibility 6 months before (baseline) and 12 months after (study period) the PHN index date. Patients with ≥1 claim for a lidocaine patch during the study period (n = 872) were compared to patients without a lidocaine patch claim (comparison group). Baseline characteristics, study period treatment and healthcare costs (reimbursements by Medicaid for medical services and prescription drugs) were compared between groups using univariate analyses.

Results:

PHN patients in the lidocaine patch group were older (64.5 vs. 62.2 years; p = 0.002) and had higher rates of pain-related comorbidities (e.g., back/neck pain, osteoarthritis) than comparison patients. Average PHN-related drug costs per patient were higher ($1994 vs. 1137; p < 0.0001) among lidocaine patch patients, with lidocaine patch accounting for $505 of the difference. PHN-related medical costs appeared lower in the lidocaine patch group, although not statistically significant ($983 vs. 1294; p = 0.1348). No significant differences were found in total healthcare costs ($20,175 vs. 19,124; p = 0.3720) across groups, despite higher total prescription drug costs among lidocaine patch patients. A similar pattern was observed among LTC patients.

Conclusions:

Despite higher rates of comorbidities and prescription drug costs, lidocaine patch patients had similar study period healthcare costs as comparison patients. The cost of the lidocaine patch represented a small fraction of overall costs incurred over the study period.

Limitations:

Findings are based on a Medicaid sample and may not be generalizable to all PHN patients.

Key words::

• Costs
• Cost analysis
• Lidocaine patch
• Long-term care
• Medicaid
• Postherpetic neuralgia

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was funded by Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

N.Y.K., H.G.B., R.W., E.K., and J.I.I. have disclosed that they are employees of Analysis Group, a company under contract with Endo Pharmaceuticals to conduct this study. R.A.P., R.H.B-J., and K.H.S. have disclosed that they are employees of Endo Pharmaceuticals.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Dr Stephen Camper of Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for his assistance in manuscript preparation and review.

Material from this study was presented as a poster at the American Pain Society’s 29th annual scientific meeting, Baltimore, MD, May 6–8, 2010, under the title: ‘Descriptive profile of Medicaid patients with postherpetic neuralgia treated and untreated with lidocaine patch 5%’.