Reduction of Costs of Disability Using Neuroprostheses

The lifetime costs associated with spinal cord injury are substantial. Assistive technology that reduces complications, increases independence, or decreases the need for attendant services can provide economic as well as medical or functional benefit. This study describes two approaches for estimating the economic consequences of implanted neuroprostheses utilizing functional electrical stimulation. Life care plan analysis was used to estimate the costs of bladder and bowel care with and without a device restoring bladder and bowel function and to compare these with the costs of implementing the device. For a neuroprosthesis restoring hand grasp, the costs of implementation were compared to the potential savings in attendant care costs that could be achieved by the use of the device. The results indicate that the costs of implementing the bladder and bowel system would be recovered in 5 years, primarily from reduced costs of supplies, medications, and procedures. The costs of the hand grasp neuroprosthesis would be recovered over the lifetime of the user if attendant time was reduced only 2 hours per day and in a shorter time if attendant care was further reduced. Neither analysis includes valuation of the quality of life, which is further enhanced by the neuroprostheses through restoration of greater independence and dignity. Our results demonstrate that implantable neuroprosthetic systems provide good health care value in addition to improved independence for the disabled individual.

[1]  M. Keith,et al.  Development of a quantitative hand grasp and release test for patients with tetraplegia using a hand neuroprosthesis. , 1994, The Journal of hand surgery.

[2]  F M Debruyne,et al.  Worldwide experience with the Finetech‐Brindley sacral anterior root stimulator , 1993, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[3]  C. H. Patrick,et al.  Long-term survival of veterans with traumatic spinal cord injury. , 1993, Archives of neurology.

[4]  Sven E. Wilson,et al.  The Economic Consequences of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury , 1992 .

[5]  M. Barat,et al.  Implantation of anterior sacral root stimulators combined with posterior sacral rhizotomy in spinal injury patients , 1998, World Journal of Urology.

[6]  G. Brindley,et al.  The first 500 patients with sacral anterior root stimulator implants: general description , 1994, Paraplegia.

[7]  Gale G. Whiteneck,et al.  Spinal cord injury : clinical outcomes from the model systems , 1995 .

[8]  E. Marsolais,et al.  Implanted Functional Neuromuscular Stimulation systems for individuals with cervical spinal cord injuries: clinical case reports. , 1996, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  G. Creasey,et al.  Electrical stimulation of sacral roots for micturition after spinal cord injury. , 1993, The Urologic clinics of North America.

[10]  P. Rosier,et al.  Results of the treatment of neurogenic bladder dysfunction in spinal cord injury by sacral posterior root rhizotomy and anterior sacral root stimulation. , 1996, The Journal of urology.

[11]  M. Keith,et al.  Functional evaluation of quadriplegic patients using a hand neuroprosthesis. , 1990, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  M. Essink‐bot,et al.  Sacral Rhizotomies and Electrical Bladder Stimulation in Spinal Cord Injury , 1997 .

[13]  P H Peckham,et al.  Functional neuromuscular stimulation: outcomes in young people with tetraplegia. , 1994, The Journal of the American Paraplegia Society.

[14]  P. H. Peckham,et al.  An Implanted Upper-Extremity Neuroprosthesis. Follow-up of Five Patients* , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  E. Marsolais,et al.  Implantation of a 16‐Channel Functional Electrical Stimulation Walking System , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  G. Brindley The first 500 sacral anterior root stimulators: implant failures and their repair , 1995, Paraplegia.

[17]  H. E. van der Aa,et al.  Sacral rhizotomies and electrical bladder stimulation in spinal cord injury. Part I: Clinical and urodynamic analysis. Dutch Study Group on Sacral Anterior Root Stimulation. , 1998, European urology.

[18]  M J Mulcahey,et al.  Quantitative comparison of grasp and release abilities with and without functional neuromuscular stimulation in adolescents with tetraplegia , 1996, Paraplegia.

[19]  M. Essink‐bot,et al.  Sacral rhizotomies and electrical bladder stimulation in spinal cord injury. Part II: cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis. , 1997 .

[20]  Dennis D. Roscoe,et al.  An Externally Powered, Multichannel, Implantable Stimulator for Versatile Control of Paralyzed Muscle , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  K. Kilgore,et al.  Satisfaction with and usage of a hand neuroprosthesis. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[22]  K. Kilgore,et al.  Implantable functional neuromuscular stimulation in the tetraplegic hand. , 1989, The Journal of hand surgery.