Evidence Hub

Clinical benefits and economic cost-savings of remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) for migraine prevention

Robert P. Cowan, A. Stark-Inbar, Liron Rabany, Dagan Harris, Maya Vizel, Alon Ironi, Julio R. Vieira, Michelle Galen et al.

Journal of Medical Economics, 2023

248 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Abstract Aims Assess the clinical benefits and associated direct and indirect cost-savings from Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) for migraine prevention. Methods REN, a prescribed, wearable, FDA-cleared neuromodulation-device for acute and/or preventive treatment of migraine, recently demonstrated efficacy for migraine prevention when used every-other-day, in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center study. Following baseline (4-weeks), subjects underwent treatment with REN or placebo (8-weeks), and electronically reported migraine symptoms and acute treatments daily. Therapeutic-gain was the between-groups difference (REN minus placebo) in change from baseline to the second month of intervention. Health-economics impact was derived as cost-savings associated with REN’s clinical benefits. Results Out of 248 subjects randomized (128 active, 120 placebo), 179 (95:84) qualified for modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis. Significant therapeutic gains favoring REN vs. placebo were found (Tepper et al. 2023), including mean (±SD) reduction in number of acute medication days (3.5 ± 0.4 vs. 1.2 ± 0.5; gain = 2.2; p = .001) and presenteeism days (2.7 ± 0.3 vs. 1.1 ± 0.4; gain = 1.6, p = .001). Mean changes of provider visits (reduction of 0.09 ± 0.1 vs. increase of 0.08 ± 0.2; p = .297), and reduction of absenteeism days (0.07 ± 0.1 vs. 0.07 ± 0.2; p = .997) were not significant. Mean annual cost-saving for one patient using REN for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 248 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free