Economic Evaluation of Sedative Deprescribing in Older Adults by Community Pharmacists

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin P Turner ◽  
Chiranjeev Sanyal ◽  
Philippe Martin ◽  
Cara Tannenbaum
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Public Health Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Sedative use in older adults increases the risk of falls, fractures, and hospitalizations. The D-PRESCRIBE (Developing Pharmacist-Led Research to Educate and Sensitize Community Residents to the Inappropriate Prescriptions Burden in the Elderly), pragmatic randomized clinical trial demonstrated that community-based, pharmacist-led education delivered simultaneously to older adults and their primary care providers reduce the use of sedatives by 43% over 6 months. However, the associated health benefits and cost savings have yet to be described. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the D-PRESCRIBE intervention compared to usual care for reducing the use of potentially inappropriate sedatives among older adults. Methods A cost-utility analysis from the public health care perspective of Canada estimated the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with the D-PRESCRIBE intervention compared to usual care over a 1-year time horizon. Transition probabilities, intervention effectiveness, utility, and costs were derived from the literature. Probabilistic analyses were performed using a decision tree and Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results Compared to usual care, pharmacist-led deprescribing is less costly (−$1392.05 CAD) and more effective (0.0769 QALYs). Using common willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $50 000 and $100 000, D-PRESCRIBE was the optimal strategy. Scenario analysis indicated the cost-effectiveness of D-PRESCRIBE is sensitive to the rate of deprescribing. Conclusions Community pharmacist-led deprescribing of sedatives is cost-effective, leading to greater quality-of-life and harm reduction among older adults. As the pharmacist’s scope of practice expands, consideration should be given to interprofessional models of remuneration for quality prescribing and deprescribing services.

scholarly journals Cost-Utility Analysis of Hearing Aid Device for Older Adults in the Community: A Delayed Start Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Palvinder Kaur ◽  
Sheue Lih Chong ◽  
Palvannan Kannapiran ◽  
Kelvin WS Teo ◽  
Charis Ng Wei Ling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Index Visit ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Abstract BackgroundHearing aids (HA) is the primary medical intervention aimed to reduce hearing handicap. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HA for older adults who were volunteered to be screened for hearing loss in a community based mobile hearing clinic (MHC).MethodsParticipants with (1) at least moderate hearing loss (≥40 dB HL) in at least one ear, (2) no prior usage of HA, (3) no ear related medical complications, and (4) had a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥18 were eligible for this study. Using a delayed-start study design, participants were randomized into the immediate-start (Fitted) group where HA was fitted immediately or the delayed-start (Not Fitted) group where HA fitting was delayed for three months. Cost utility analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of being fitted with HA combined with short-term, aural rehabilitation with the routine care group who were not fitted with HA. Incremental cost effectiveness ration (ICER) was computed. Health Utility Index (HUI-3) was used to measure utility gain, a component required to derive the quality adjusted life years (QALY). Total costs included direct healthcare costs, direct non-healthcare costs and indirect costs (productivity loss of participant and caregiver). Demographic data was collected during the index visit to MHC. Cost and utility data were collected three months after index visit and projected to five years.ResultsThere were 264 participants in the Fitted group and 163 participants in the Not Fitted group. No between-group differences in age, gender, ethnicity, housing type and degree of hearing loss were observed at baseline. At 3 months, HA fitting led to a mean utility increase of 0.12 and an ICER gain of S$42,790/QALY (95% CI: S$32, 793/QALY to S$62,221/QALY). At five years, the ICER was estimated to be at S$11,964/QALY (95% CI: S$8,996/QALY to S$17,080/QALY) assuming 70% of the participants continued using the HA. As fewer individuals continued using their fitted HA, the ICER increased.ConclusionsHA fitting can be cost-effective and could improve the quality of life of hearing-impaired older individuals within a brief period of device fitting. Long term cost-effectiveness of HA fitting is dependent on its continued usage.

scholarly journals Cost-utility analysis of hearing aid device for older adults in the community: a delayed start study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Palvinder Kaur ◽  
Sheue Lih Chong ◽  
Palvannan Kannapiran ◽  
W.-S. Kelvin Teo ◽  
Charis Ng Wei Ling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Index Visit ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Hearing aids (HA) is the primary medical intervention aimed to reduce hearing handicap. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HA for older adults who were volunteered to be screened for hearing loss in a community-based mobile hearing clinic (MHC). Methods Participants with (1) at least moderate hearing loss (≥40 dB HL) in at least one ear, (2) no prior usage of HA, (3) no ear related medical complications, and (4) had a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 18 were eligible for this study. Using a delayed-start study design, participants were randomized into the immediate-start (Fitted) group where HA was fitted immediately or the delayed-start (Not Fitted) group where HA fitting was delayed for three months. Cost utility analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of being fitted with HA combined with short-term, aural rehabilitation with the routine care group who were not fitted with HA. Incremental cost effectiveness ration (ICER) was computed. Health Utility Index (HUI-3) was used to measure utility gain, a component required to derive the quality adjusted life years (QALY). Total costs included direct healthcare costs, direct non-healthcare costs and indirect costs (productivity loss of participant and caregiver). Demographic data was collected during the index visit to MHC. Cost and utility data were collected three months after index visit and projected to five years. Results There were 264 participants in the Fitted group and 163 participants in the Not Fitted group. No between-group differences in age, gender, ethnicity, housing type and degree of hearing loss were observed at baseline. At 3 months, HA fitting led to a mean utility increase of 0.12 and an ICER gain of S$42,790/QALY (95% CI: S$32, 793/QALY to S$62,221/QALY). At five years, the ICER was estimated to be at S$11,964/QALY (95% CI: S$8996/QALY to S$17,080/QALY) assuming 70% of the participants continued using the HA. As fewer individuals continued using their fitted HA, the ICER increased. Conclusions HA fitting can be cost-effective and could improve the quality of life of hearing-impaired older individuals within a brief period of device fitting. Long term cost-effectiveness of HA fitting is dependent on its continued usage.

scholarly journals Cost–utility analysis of antimicrobial stewardship programme at a tertiary teaching hospital in Ethiopia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e047515
Author(s):  
Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle ◽  
Damen Haile Mariam ◽  
Stephen Mac ◽  
Workeabeba Abebe ◽  
Tinsae Alemayehu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Tertiary Care Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

ObjectiveAntimicrobial stewardship (AMS) significantly reduces inappropriate antibiotic use and improves patient outcomes. In low-resource settings, AMS implementation may require concurrent strengthening of clinical microbiology capacity therefore additional investments. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of implementing AMS at Tikur Anbessa Specialised Hospital (TASH), a tertiary care hospital in Ethiopia.DesignWe developed a Markov cohort model to assess the cost–utility of pharmacist-led AMS with concurrent strengthening of laboratory capacity compared with usual care from a ‘restricted societal’ perspective. We used a lifetime time horizon and discounted health outcomes and cost at 3% annually. Data were extracted from a prospective study of bloodstream infections among patients hospitalised at TASH, supplemented by published literature. We assessed parameter uncertainty using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.SettingTertiary care hospital in Ethiopia, with 800 beds and serves over half a million patients per year.PopulationCohort of adults and children inpatient population aged 19.8 years at baseline.InterventionLaboratory-supported pharmacist-led AMS compared with usual care. Usual care is defined as empirical initiation of antibiotic therapy in the absence of strong laboratory and AMS.Outcome measuresExpected life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (US$2018) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.ResultsLaboratory-supported AMS strategy dominated usual care, that is, AMS was associated with an expected incremental gain of 38.8 QALYs at lower expected cost (incremental cost savings:US$82 370) per 1000 patients compared with usual care. Findings were sensitive to medication cost, infection-associated mortality and AMS-associated mortality reduction. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that AMS programme was likely to be cost-effective at 100% of the simulation compared with usual care at 1%–51% of gross domestic product/capita.ConclusionOur study indicates that laboratory-supported pharmacist-led AMS can result in improved health outcomes and substantial healthcare cost savings, demonstrating its economic advantage in a tertiary care hospital despite greater upfront investments in a low-resource setting.

scholarly journals Cost-Utility Analysis of Hearing Aid Device for Older Adults in the Community: A Delayed Start Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Palvinder Kaur ◽  
Sheue Lih Chong ◽  
Palvannan Kannapiran ◽  
Kelvin WS Teo ◽  
Charis Ng Wei Ling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Index Visit ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Hearing aids (HA) is the primary medical intervention aimed to reduce hearing handicap. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HA for older adults who were volunteered to be screened for hearing loss in a community based mobile hearing clinic (MHC).Methods Participants with (1) at least moderate hearing loss (≥40 dB HL) in at least one ear, (2) no prior usage of HA, (3) no ear related medical complications, and (4) had a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥18 were eligible for this study. Using a delayed-start study design, participants were randomized into the immediate-start (Fitted) group where HA was fitted immediately or the delayed-start (Not Fitted) group where HA fitting was delayed for three months. Cost utility analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of being fitted with HA combined with short-term, aural rehabilitation with the routine care group who were not fitted with HA. Incremental cost effectiveness ration (ICER) was computed. Health Utility Index (HUI-3) was used to measure utility gain, a component required to derive the quality adjusted life years (QALY). Total costs included direct healthcare costs, direct non-healthcare costs and indirect costs (productivity loss of participant and caregiver). Demographic data was collected during the index visit to MHC. Cost and utility data were collected three months after index visit and projected to five years.Results There were 264 participants in the Fitted group and 163 participants in the Not Fitted group. No between-group differences in age, gender, ethnicity, housing type and degree of hearing loss were observed at baseline. At 3 months, HA fitting led to a mean utility increase of 0.12 and an ICER gain of S$42,790/QALY (95% CI: S$32, 793/QALY to S$62,221/QALY). At five years, the ICER was estimated to be at S$11,964/QALY (95% CI: S$8,996/QALY to S$17,080/QALY) assuming 70% of the participants continued using the HA. As fewer individuals continued using their fitted HA, the ICER increased.Conclusions HA fitting can be cost-effective and could improve the quality of life of hearing-impaired older individuals within a brief period of device fitting. Long term cost-effectiveness of HA fitting is dependent on its continued usage.

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Alongside Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Song-Yi Kim ◽  
Hyangsook Lee ◽  
Younbyoung Chae ◽  
Hi-Joon Park ◽  
Hyejung Lee
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
German Studies ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Cost

Objective To summarise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Methods We identified full economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the consequences and costs of acupuncture for any medical condition. Eleven electronic databases were searched up to March 2011 without language restrictions. Eligible RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane criteria for risk of bias and a modified version of the checklist for economic evaluation. The general characteristics and the results of each economic analysis such as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were extracted. Results Of 17 included studies, nine were CUAs that measured quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and eight were CEAs that assessed effectiveness of acupuncture based on improvements in clinical symptoms. All CUAs showed that acupuncture with or without usual care was cost-effective compared with waiting list control or usual care alone, with ICERs ranging from ¢3011/QALY (dysmenorrhoea) to ¢22 298/QALY (allergic rhinitis) in German studies, and from £3855/QALY (osteoarthritis) to £9951/QALY (headache) in UK studies. In the CEAs, acupuncture was beneficial at a relatively low cost in six European and Asian studies. All CUAs were well-designed with a low risk of bias, but this was not the case for CEAs. Conclusions Overall, this review demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Despite such promising results, any generalisation of these results needs to be made with caution given the diversity of diseases and the different status of acupuncture in the various countries.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF IVABRADINE IN TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH HEART FAILURE IN IRAN

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 576-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Taheri ◽  
Elham Heidari ◽  
Mohammad Ali Aivazi ◽  
Mehran Shams-Beyranvand ◽  
Mehdi Varmaghani
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Drug Acquisition ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Baseline Heart Rate ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Objectives:This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ivabradine plus standard of care (SoC) in comparison with current SoC alone from the Iranian payer perspective.Methods:A cohort-based Markov model was developed to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a 10-year time horizon in a cohort of 1,000 patients. The baseline transition probabilities between New York Heart Association (NYHA), mortality rate, and hospitalization rate were extracted from the literature. The effect of ivabradine on mortality, hospitalization, and NYHA improvement or worsening were retrieved from the SHIFT study. The effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) using the utility values derived from Iranian Heart Failure Quality of Life study. Direct medical costs were obtained from hospital records and national tariffs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to show the robustness of the model.Results:Ivabradine therapy was associated with an incremental cost per QALY of USD $5,437 (incremental cost of USD $2,207 and QALYs gained 0.41) versus SoC. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ivabradine is expected to have a 60 percent chance of being cost-effective accepting a threshold of USD $6,550 per QALY. Furthermore, deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the model is sensitive to the ivabradine drug acquisition cost.Conclusions:The cost-effectiveness model suggested that the addition of ivabradine to SoC therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes along with increased costs. The analysis indicates that the clinical benefit of ivabradine can be achieved at a reasonable cost in eligible heart failure patients with sinus rhythm and a baseline heart rate ≥ 75 beats per minute (bpm).

scholarly journals Electroacupuncture with Usual Care for Patients with Non-Acute Pain after Back Surgery: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 5033
Author(s):  
NamKwen Kim ◽  
Kyung-Min Shin ◽  
Eun-Sung Seo ◽  
Minjung Park ◽  
Hye-Yoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
National Health ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Back Surgery ◽  
The Cost

Electroacupuncture (EA) is used to treat pain after back surgery. Although this treatment is covered by national health insurance in Korea, evidence supporting its cost-effectiveness and contribution to the sustainability of the national health care system has yet to be published. Therefore, an economic evaluation, alongside a clinical trial, was conducted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of EA and usual care (UC) versus UC alone to treat non-acute low back pain (LBP). In total, 108 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to treatment groups; 106 were included in the final cost utility analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EA plus UC was estimated as 7,048,602 Korean Rate Won (KRW) per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from the societal perspective (SP). If the national threshold was KRW 30 million per QALY, the cost-effectiveness probability of EA plus UC was an estimated 85.9%; and, if the national threshold was over KRW 42,496,372 per QALY, the cost-effectiveness probability would be over 95% percent statistical significance. Based on these results, EA plus UC combination therapy for patients with non-acute LBP may be cost-effective from a societal perspective in Korea.

scholarly journals Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profile Testing in Community Practice

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 554-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Chandler ◽  
Clyde B. Schechter ◽  
Jinani Jayasekera ◽  
Aimee Near ◽  
Suzanne C. O’Neill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Purpose Gene expression profile (GEP) testing can support chemotherapy decision making for patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor 2–negative breast cancers. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of one GEP test, Onco type DX (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA), in community practice with test-eligible patients age 40 to 79 years. Methods A simulation model compared 25-year societal incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of community Onco type DX use from 2005 to 2012 versus usual care in the pretesting era (2000 to 2004). Inputs included Onco type DX and chemotherapy data from an integrated health care system and national and published data on Onco type DX accuracy, chemotherapy effectiveness, utilities, survival and recurrence, and Medicare and patient costs. Sensitivity analyses varied individual parameters; results were also estimated for ideal conditions (ie, 100% testing and adherence to test-suggested treatment, perfect test accuracy, considering test effects on reassurance or worry, and lowest costs). Results Twenty-four percent of test-eligible patients had Onco type DX testing. Testing was higher in younger patients and patients with stage I disease ( v stage IIA), and 75.3% and 10.2% of patients with high and low recurrence risk scores received chemotherapy, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio for testing ( v usual care) was $188,125 per QALY. Considering test effects on worry versus reassurance decreased the cost-effectiveness ratio to $58,431 per QALY. With perfect test accuracy, the cost-effectiveness ratio was $28,947 per QALY, and under ideal conditions, it was $39,496 per QALY. Conclusion GEP testing is likely to have a high cost-effectiveness ratio on the basis of community practice patterns. However, realistic variations in assumptions about key variables could result in GEP testing having cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of other accepted interventions. The differences in cost-effectiveness ratios on the basis of community versus ideal conditions underscore the importance of considering real-world implementation when assessing the new technology.

P0434COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF MAINTANCE THERAPY WITH AZATHIOPRIME VERSUS RITUXIMAB (TAILORED OR FIXED-SCHEDULE) IN ADULTS WITH GENERALIZED ANCA VASCULITIS IN COLOMBIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kateir Mariel Contreras ◽  
Viviana Orozco Ortiz ◽  
Eduardo José Puche ◽  
Paola Karina Garcia ◽  
Camilo Alberto Gonzalez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Anca Vasculitis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background and Aims Azathioprine has been for decades the drug of choice for maintenance therapy in patients with generalized ANCA vasculitis in remission. However, recent studies show that rituximab, a high-cost biological agent, which can be administrated in two different schedules, might be more effective, so it is necessary to know the cost- effectiveness. Our goal was to compare the cost-effectiveness of the 3 maintenance schemes: standard therapy with azathioprine; fixed-dose rituximab and rituximab tailored according to CD19 lymphocyte level and ANCA titres, from the perspective of the Colombian healthcare system. Method We designed a 5-year annual cycle Markov model with the following stages: remission, minor relapse, mayor relapse and death. Transition probabilities were obtained from a systematic review of the literature (Scopus and Pubmed). Following national guidelines for economic studies, costs (in 2018, 1 euro = 3489 Colombian pesos) were estimated based on national drug registries, and official tariff manuals for procedures and other resources. Main outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALY), using lupus nephropathy as a proxy; values were obtained from Tufts CEA Registry and validated by local expert panel through a modified Delphi technique. Cost-effectiveness threshold was three-times per capita GDP (16.872 euros). Discount rate was 5%. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results Overall discounted 5-years costs were € 1149 for azathioprine; € 4025 for tailored rituximab and € 5221 for fixed rituximab. QALY gains were 2.94, 3.63 and 3.64, respectively. Both tailored and fixed rituximab were cost-effective (cost per QALY gained: € 4168 and € 5817 respectively), but tailored dosing was preferable due to its lower cost. Sensitivity analyses did not modify these results significantly. Conclusion To our knowledge this is the first economic evaluation that compare azathioprine with tailored and fixed rituximab regimens as a vasculitis maintenance treatment in adults with ANCA generalized. Due to its lower effectiveness azathioprine should not be the first line of treatment. Tailored rituximab should be a better option than fixed schedule due to its lower cost with similar effectiveness.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention for the Prevention of Falls in Older People: The REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention Trial Findings

Gerontology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 503-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belen Corbacho ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
Caroline Fairhurst ◽  
Catherine E. Hewitt ◽  
Kate Hicks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Older People ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Falls Prevention ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Background: Falls are a major cause of morbidity among older people. Multifaceted interventions may be effective in preventing falls and related fractures. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness alongside the REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) trial. Methods: REFORM was a pragmatic multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial in England and Ireland; 1,010 participants (> 65 years) were randomised to receive either a podiatry intervention (n = 493), including foot and ankle strengthening exercises, foot orthoses, new footwear if required, and a falls prevention leaflet, or usual podiatry treatment plus a falls prevention leaflet (n = 517). Primary outcome: incidence of falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. Secondary outcomes: proportion of fallers and quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) which was converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each participant. Differences in mean costs and QALYs at 12 months were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted in accordance with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence reference case standards, using a regression-based approach with costs expressed in GBP (2015 price). The base case analysis used an intention-to-treat approach on the imputed data set using multiple imputation. Results: There was a small, non-statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.73–1.05, p = 0.16). Participants allocated to the intervention group accumulated on average marginally higher QALYs than the usual care participants (mean difference 0.0129, 95% CI –0.0050 to 0.0314). The intervention costs were on average GBP 252 more per participant compared to the usual care participants (95% CI GBP –69 to GBP 589). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between GBP 19,494 and GBP 20,593 per QALY gained, below the conventional National Health Service cost-effectiveness thresholds of GBP 20,000 to GBP 30,000 per additional QALY. The probability that the podiatry intervention is cost-effective at a threshold of GBP 30,000 per QALY gained was 0.65. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: The benefits of the intervention justified the moderate cost. The intervention could be a cost-effective option for falls prevention when compared with usual care in the UK.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document