scholarly journals OP0152-HPR A COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF MULTIMODAL OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH THUMB BASE OSTEOARTHRITIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 96.2-96
Author(s):  
A. T. Tveter ◽  
L. Kleven ◽  
N. Osteras ◽  
R. Nossum ◽  
R. E. Mehl Eide ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Occupational Therapy ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Assistive Devices ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Hand Osteoarthritis ◽  
Waiting Period

Background:Patient education, hand exercises, and use of assistive devices and orthoses are regarded as first-line treatment for patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA) (1), however there is limited evidence for the cost-effectiveness of such treatment.Objectives:The objective of this study is to assess the cost-utility of a multimodal occupational therapy treatment delivered in the waiting period before surgical consultation in patients with thumb base OA compared to usual care.Methods:This study presents an economic evaluation assessing the difference in health care use and quality-of-life during a 24-month period in a Norwegian multicenter randomized controlled trial. All patients referred to surgical consultation due to thumb base OA at three departments of rheumatology between 2013 and 2015 were eligible for inclusion. In total, 180 patients were included and randomized to a control group or a multimodal occupational therapy group (90 patients in each group). During the waiting period between referral and actual surgical consultation, the control group continued with usual care which was staying on the waiting list and receiving information on hand OA. The intervention group got information on hand OA, ergonomic principles and use of assistive devices, and they were instructed in home-based hand exercises and received a day and a night orthosis. The intervention group was instructed to use the orthoses and assistive devices as much as possible and perform home exercises three times per week for 12 weeks. The patients were assessed at baseline and after 4, 18 and 24 months. The within-trial economic analysis reports the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) reflecting the between-group difference in incremental cost per adjusted life years (QALY) over 24 months. A generic health-related quality of life questionnaire, the EuroQol 5 Dimension, was used to calculate the QALYs at baseline, 4, 18 and 24 months. Costs were collected from different sources, taking a health care perspective; The occupation therapist reported the number of consultations related to the intervention; surgical procedure and post-operative follow-up were collected from patients’ journals; and additional consumption of primary and specialist health care was self-reported by the patient. Sensitivity analyses were performed. The results are presented in a cost-effectiveness plane using bootstrapping. Willingness-to-pay threshold is set to be € 27 500 linked to the severity of this condition.Results:The mean age of the included patients was 63 years (SD 7.6) and 79% were women. There was a total between-group difference in QALYs of 0.07 utilities after 24 months, in favour of the intervention group. Operations constituted the main costs with 22 operations in the intervention group compared to 33 in the control group. The between-group difference in costs due to health care consumption was estimated to € 500 in favour of the intervention group (Figure 1).Conclusion:The results in this within-trial analysis indicate that multimodal occupational therapy in the waiting period before surgical consultation compared to usual care is a cost-effective alternative taking a health care perspective.References:[1]Kloppenburg, M., et al. (2018). “2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis.”Ann Rheum Dis.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals OP0198-HPR A STRUCTURED MODEL FOR OA CARE IN PRIMARY HEALTHCARE IS A COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE COMPARED TO USUAL CARE FOR PEOPLE WITH HIP AND KNEE OA

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 119-120
Author(s):  
N. Østerås ◽  
E. Aas ◽  
T. Moseng ◽  
L. Van Bodegom-Vos ◽  
K. Dziedzic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
Primary Healthcare ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Structured Model ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Cost Effective Alternative ◽  
The Cost

Background:To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), a structured model for integrated OA care was developed based on international treatment recommendations. A previous analysis of a cluster RCT (cRCT) showed that compared to usual care, the intervention group reported higher quality of care and greater satisfaction with care. Also, more patients were treated according to international guidelines and fulfilled recommendations for physical activity at the 6-month follow-up.Objectives:To assess the cost-utility of a structured model for hip or knee OA care.Methods:A cRCT with stepped-wedge cohort design was conducted in 6 Norwegian municipalities (clusters) in 2015-17. The OA care model was implemented in one cluster at the time by switching from “usual care” to the structured model. The implementation of the model was facilitated by interactive workshops for general practitioners (GPs) and physiotherapists (PTs) with an update on OA treatment recommendations. The GPs explained the OA diagnosis and treatment alternatives, provided pharmacological treatment when appropriate, and suggested referral to physiotherapy. The PT-led patient OA education programme was group-based and lasted 3 hours followed by an 8–12-week individually tailored resistance exercise programme with twice weekly 1-hour supervised group sessions (5–10 patients per PT). An optional 10-hours Healthy Eating Program was available. Participants were ≥45 years with symptomatic hip or knee OA.Costs were measured from the healthcare perspective and collected from several sources. Patients self-reported visits in primary healthcare at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Secondary healthcare visits and joint surgery data were extracted from the Norwegian Patient Register. The health outcome, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was estimated based on the EQ-5D-5L scores at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The result of the cost-utility analysis was reported using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as the incremental costs relative to incremental QALYs (QALYs gained). Based on Norwegian guidelines, the threshold is €27500. Sensitivity analyses were performed using bootstrapping to assess the robustness of reported results and presented in a cost-effectiveness plane (Figure 1).Results:The 393 patients’ mean age was 63 years (SD 9.6) and 74% were women. 109 patients were recruited during control periods (control group), and 284 patients were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). Only the intervention group had a significant increase in EQ-5D-5L utility scores from baseline to 12 months follow-up (mean change 0.03; 95% CI 0.01, 0.05) with QALYs gained: 0.02 (95% CI -0.08, 0.12). The structured OA model cost approx. €301 p.p. with an additional €50 for the Healthy Eating Program. Total 12 months healthcare cost p.p. was €1281 in the intervention and €3147 in the control group, resulting in an incremental cost of -€1866 (95% CI -3147, -584) p.p. Costs related to surgical procedures had the largest impact on total healthcare costs in both groups. During the 12-months follow-up period, 5% (n=14) in the intervention compared to 12% (n=13) in the control group underwent joint surgery; resulting in a mean surgical procedure cost of €553 p.p. in the intervention as compared to €1624 p.p. in the control group. The ICER was -€93300, indicating that the OA care model resulted in QALYs gained and cost-savings. At a threshold of €27500, it is 99% likely that the OA care model is a cost-effective alternative.Conclusion:The results of the cost-utility analysis show that implementing a structured model for OA care in primary healthcare based on international guidelines is highly likely a cost-effective alternative compared to usual care for people with hip and knee OA. More studies are needed to confirm this finding, but this study results indicate that implementing structured OA care models in primary healthcare may be beneficial for the individual as well as for the society.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of a community paramedicine programme for low-income seniors living in subsidised housing: the community paramedicine at clinic programme (CP@clinic)

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e037386
Author(s):  
Gina Agarwal ◽  
Melissa Pirrie ◽  
Ricardo Angeles ◽  
Francine Marzanek ◽  
Lehana Thabane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Programme Cost ◽  
Community Paramedicine ◽  
Life Years

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Community Paramedicine at Clinic (CP@clinic) programme compared with usual care in seniors residing in subsidised housing.DesignA cost–utility analysis was conducted within a large pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). Subsidised housing buildings were matched by sociodemographics and location (rural/urban), and allocated to intervention (CP@clinic for 1 year) or control (usual care) via computer-assisted paired randomisation.SettingThirty-two subsidised seniors’ housing buildings in Ontario.ParticipantsBuilding residents 55 years and older.InterventionCP@clinic is a weekly community paramedic-led, chronic disease prevention and health promotion programme in the building common areas. CP@clinic is free to residents and includes risk assessments, referrals to resources, and reports back to family physicians.Outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, measured with EQ-5D-3L. QALYs were estimated using area-under-the curve over the 1-year intervention, controlling for preintervention utility scores and building pairings. Programme cost data were collected before and during implementation. Costs associated with emergency medical services (EMS) use were estimated. An incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) based on incremental costs and health outcomes between groups was calculated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using bootstrapping was performed.ResultsThe RCT included 1461 residents; 146 and 125 seniors completed the EQ-5D-3L in intervention and control buildings, respectively. There was a significant adjusted mean QALY gain of 0.03 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.05) for the intervention group. Total programme cost for implementing in five communities was $C128 462 and the reduction in EMS calls avoided an estimated $C256 583. The ICER was $C2933/QALY (bootstrapped mean ICER with Fieller’s 95% CI was $4850 ($2246 to $12 396)) but could be even more cost effective after accounting for the EMS call reduction.ConclusionThe CP@clinic ICER was well below the commonly used Canadian cost–utility threshold of $C50 000. CP@clinic scale-up across subsidised housing is feasible and could result in better health-related quality-of-life and reduced EMS use in low-income seniors.Trial registration numberClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02152891.

Randomized clinical trial of medical qigong on quality of life, fatigue, side effects, mood, status, and inflammation of cancer patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9617-9617
Author(s):  
B. Oh ◽  
P. Butow ◽  
B. Mullan ◽  
S. Clarke ◽  
P. Beale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Sleep Disturbance ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Usual Care Control Group

9617 Background: The quality of life (QOL) of cancer patients is often diminished due to the side effects of treatment and symptoms of the disease itself. This study examines the impact of Medical Qigong (MQ), including gentle exercise and relaxation through meditation and breathing exercise based on the Chinese Medicine theory of energy channels, on quality of life (QOL), fatigue, side effects, mood status and inflammation. Methods: One hundred sixty two patients diagnosed with a range of cancers recruited from three university teaching hospitals were randomly assigned to two groups: a control group (n=83) that received usual health care and an intervention group (n=79) who participated in a MQ program for 10 weeks in addition to receiving usual health care at the hospital. Quality of life and symptoms were measured by the FACT-G, cancer related fatigue by FACT-F and mood status by POMS. The inflammatory marker serum C-reactive protein (CRP) was also monitored serially. Results: Regression analysis indicated that the MQ intervention group significantly improved on measures of overall QOL (t144= -5.761, p<0.001), fatigue (t153= -5.621, p<0.001), mood disturbance (t122=2.346, p=0.021) and inflammation (CRP) (t99=2.042, p<0.044) compared to the usual care control group after controlling for baseline variables. Analysis of the FACT-G subscales revealed that the MQ intervention group also significantly improved in satisfaction with sex life (t92=-3.783, p<0.001) and reduced side effects of nausea (t152=-2.071, p=0.040) and sleep disturbance (t150=-2.603, p=0.010) compared to the usual care control group. Pain was improved in both intervention and control groups. Conclusions: This study suggests that MQ with usual health care can improve overall QOL, fatigue, positive mood status and reduce the side effects of nausea, sleep disturbance and inflammation of cancer patients. This study supports the use of MQ as an intervention for cancer care. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Post-hospital medical respite care for homeless people in Denmark: A randomized controlled trial and cost-utility analysis.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Nygaard Bring ◽  
Marie Kruse ◽  
Mikkel Ankarfeldt ◽  
Nina Brünés ◽  
Maja Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Homeless People ◽  
Respite Care ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Being homeless entails higher mortality, morbidity, and prevalence of psychiatric diseases. This can lead to more frequent and expensive use of health care services. Medical respite care enables an opportunity to recuperate after a hospitalization and has shown a positive effect on readmissions, but little is known about the cost-effectiveness of medical respite care for homeless people discharged from acute hospitalization. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2-week stay in post-hospital medical respite care. Methods: A randomized controlled trial and cost-utility analysis, from a societal perspective, was conducted between April 2014 and December 2015. Homeless people aged >18 years with an acute admission were included from 10 different hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention group (n=53) was offered a 2-week medical respite care stay at a Red Cross facility and the control group (n=43) was discharged without any extra help (usual care), but with the opportunity to seek help in shelters and from street nurses and doctors in the municipalities. The primary outcome was the difference in health care costs 3 months following inclusion in the study. Secondary outcomes were change in health-related quality of life and health care costs 6 months following inclusion in the study. Data were collected through Danish registries, financial management systems in the municipalities and at the Red Cross, and by using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Results: After 3 and 6 months, the intervention group had €4,761 (p=0.10) and €8,515 (p=0.04) lower costs than the control group, respectively. The higher costs in the control group were mainly related to acute admissions. Both groups had minor quality-adjusted life year gains. Conclusions: This is the first randomized controlled trial to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2-week medical respite care stay for homeless people after hospitalization. The study showed that a medical respite care stay for homeless people is cost-effective. Furthermore, this study illustrates that it is possible to perform research with satisfying follow-up with a target group that is hard to reach. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02649595

scholarly journals Effectiveness and Estimation of Cost-Effectiveness of a Group-Based Multicomponent Physical Exercise Programme on Risk of Falling and Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 2086 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Alhambra-Borrás ◽  
Estrella Durá-Ferrandis ◽  
Maite Ferrando-García
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Physical Exercise ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Exercise Programme ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Risk Of Falling ◽  
Community Dwelling Older Adults

This study analyses the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based multicomponent physical exercise programme aimed at reducing the risk of falling and frailty in community-dwelling older adults. This is a pretest–posttest non-equivalent control group design, with an intervention group and a comparison group. Participants were evaluated at baseline and after 9 months. The effectiveness analyses showed significant reduction in the risk of falling (−45.5%; p = 0.000) and frailty (−31%; p = 0.000) after the intervention for the participants in the physical exercise programme. Moreover, these participants showed an improvement in limitations in activities of daily living, self-care ability and the use of health resources, physical performance, balance and body mass index. The cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the intervention was cost-saving and more effective than usual care scenario. A novel group-based multicomponent physical exercise programme showed to be more effective and cost-effective than usual care for older adults suffering from risk of falling and frailty.

scholarly journals Effectiveness and Cost of Organized Outreach for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ma Somsouk ◽  
Carly Rachocki ◽  
Ajitha Mannalithara ◽  
Dianne Garcia ◽  
Victoria Laleau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Crc Screening

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains underused, especially in safety-net systems. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of organized outreach using fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) compared with usual care. Methods Patients age 50–75 years eligible for CRC screening from eight participating primary care safety-net clinics were randomly assigned to outreach intervention with usual care vs usual care alone. The intervention included a mailed postcard and call, followed by a mailed FIT kit, and a reminder phone call if the FIT kit was not returned. The primary outcome was screening participation at 1 year and a microcosting analysis of the outreach activities with embedded long-term cost-effectiveness of outreach. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results A total of 5386 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 5434 to usual care. FIT screening was statistically significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (57.9% vs 37.4%, P &lt; .001; difference = 20.5%, 95% confidence interval = 18.6% to 22.4%). In the intervention group, FIT completion rate was higher in patients who had previously completed a FIT vs those who had not (71.9% vs 35.7%, P &lt; .001). There was evidence of effect modification of the intervention by language, and clinic. Outreach cost approximately $23 per patient and $112 per additional patient screened. Projecting long-term outcomes, outreach was estimated to cost $9200 per quality-adjusted life-year gained vs usual care. Conclusion Population-based management with organized FIT outreach statistically significantly increased CRC screening and was cost-effective in a safety-net system. The sustainability of the program and any impact of economies of scale remain to be determined.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of systematic fast-track transition from oncological treatment to specialised palliative care at home for patients and their caregivers: the DOMUS trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Marie Bækø Halling ◽  
Rasmus Trap Wolf ◽  
Per Sjøgren ◽  
Hans Von Der Maase ◽  
Helle Timm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Fast Track ◽  
Psychological Intervention ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Incurable Cancer ◽  
Oncological Treatment ◽  
Link Type ◽  
At Home

Abstract Background While hospitals remain the most common place of death in many western countries, specialised palliative care (SPC) at home is an alternative to improve the quality of life for patients with incurable cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a systematic fast-track transition process from oncological treatment to SPC enriched with a psychological intervention at home for patients with incurable cancer and their caregivers. Methods A full economic evaluation with a time horizon of six months was performed from a societal perspective within a randomised controlled trial, the DOMUS trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01885637). The primary outcome of the health economic analysis was a incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which is obtained by comparing costs required per gain in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY). The costs included primary and secondary healthcare costs, cost of intervention and informal care from caregivers. Public transfers were analysed in seperate analysis. QALYs were measured using EORTC QLQ-C30 for patients and SF-36 for caregivers. Bootstrap simulations were performed to obtain the ICER estimate. Results In total, 321 patients (162 in intervention group, 159 in control group) and 235 caregivers (126 in intervention group, 109 in control group) completed the study. The intervention resulted in significantly higher QALYs for patients when compared to usual care (p-value = 0.026), while being more expensive as well. In the 6 months observation period, the average incremental cost of intervention compared to usual care was €2015 per patient (p value < 0.000). The mean incremental gain was 0.01678 QALY (p-value = 0.026). Thereby, the ICER was €118,292/QALY when adjusting for baseline costs and quality of life. For the caregivers, we found no significant differences in QALYs between the intervention and control group (p-value = 0.630). At a willingness to pay of €80,000 per QALY, the probability that the intervention is cost-effective lies at 15% in the base case scenario. Conclusion This model of fast-track SPC enriched with a psychological intervention yields better QALYs than usual care with a large increase in costs. Trial registration The trial was prospectively registered 25.6.2013. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01885637.

scholarly journals Post-hospital medical respite care for homeless people in Denmark: A randomized controlled trial and cost-utility analysis.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Nygaard Bring ◽  
Marie Kruse ◽  
Mikkel Ankarfeldt ◽  
Nina Brünés ◽  
Maja Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Homeless People ◽  
Respite Care ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background : Being homeless entails higher mortality, morbidity, and prevalence of psychiatric diseases. This can lead to more frequent and expensive use of health care services. Medical respite care enables an opportunity to recuperate after a hospitalization and has shown a positive effect on readmissions, but little is known about the cost-effectiveness of medical respite care for homeless people discharged from acute hospitalization. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2-week stay in post-hospital medical respite care. Methods : A randomized controlled trial and cost-utility analysis, from a societal perspective, was conducted between April 2014 and December 2015. Homeless people aged >18 years with an acute admission were included from 10 different hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark. The intervention group (n=53) was offered a 2-week medical respite care stay at a Red Cross facility and the control group (n=43) was discharged without any extra help (usual care), but with the opportunity to seek help in shelters and from street nurses and doctors in the municipalities. The primary outcome was the difference in health care costs 3 months following inclusion in the study. Secondary outcomes were change in health-related quality of life and health care costs 6 months following inclusion in the study. Data were collected through Danish registries, financial management systems in the municipalities and at the Red Cross, and by using the EQ-5D questionnaire. Results : After 3 and 6 months, the intervention group had €4,761 (p=0.10) and €8,515 (p=0.04) lower costs than the control group, respectively. The higher costs in the control group were mainly related to acute admissions. Both groups had minor quality-adjusted life year gains. Conclusions : This is the first randomized controlled trial to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2-week medical respite care stay for homeless people after hospitalization. The study showed that a medical respite care stay for homeless people is cost-effective. Furthermore, this study illustrates that it is possible to perform research with satisfying follow-up with a target group that is hard to reach. Trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02649595

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Lifestyle Intervention Targeting Women With Obesity and Infertility in Comparison to Usual Care

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A730-A730
Author(s):  
Matea Belan ◽  
Belina Carranza-Mamane ◽  
Youssef AinMelk ◽  
Marie-Helene Pesant ◽  
Farrah Jean-Denis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Lifestyle Intervention ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Care Protocol

Abstract Although lifestyle modification is considered as the first-line treatment for women with obesity and infertility, these women generally do not have access to a program supporting them in adopting healthy habits that is integrated to fertility care. Implementing such a program requires to demonstrate its efficiency. The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of an interdisciplinary lifestyle intervention (Fit-for-Fertility (FFF) program) for women with obesity and infertility, in comparison with the usual care protocol, i.e. fertility treatments. Methods: A CEA was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial, recruiting women at the fertility clinic of the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke. Women were randomized to: i) the intervention group (IG): FFF program alone for 6 months (individual follow-ups every 6 weeks and 12 group sessions), and in combination with usual care for infertility after 6 months if not pregnant; or ii) control group (CG): usual care from the outset. Data were collected in both groups, during 18 months or until the end of the pregnancy for those who became pregnant. Costs related to the management of infertility, obesity, pregnancy and childbirth, and the FFF program were considered and collected by self-reported questionnaires, review of medical records and administrative databases. Live birth (LB) rate was used to assess effectiveness. The CEA’s parameter of interest was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated by non-parametric bootstrap with 5,000 iterations. All costs are in Canadian dollars, 2019. Results: A total of 130 women were randomized (65 CG, 65 IG). We present results for the 108 women (57 CG, 51 IG) who completed at least 6 months in the study. We observed an absolute difference of 14.2% (p=0.328) in LB rate between groups (IG: 51.0%; CG: 36.8%). Total mean costs per patient were significantly higher in the IG vs the CG for healthcare system’s ($5,660 ± $3,200 vs $3,631 ± $3,389; p=0.002) and society’s ($9,745 ± $5,899 vs $6,898 ± 7,021; p=0.026) perspectives. We observed an ICER of $12,633 per additional LB [$5,319-$19,947] from the healthcare system’s perspective, and $5,980 [$3,086-$8 874] from the patients’ perspective. Overall, the ICER for the society’s perspective, which includes both previous perspectives, was estimated at $24,393 per additional LB [$15,509-$33,276]. Conclusion: According to our results, a lifestyle intervention may be clinically more effective than the usual protocol of care for women with obesity and infertility, but generates higher costs as well, resulting in a positive ICER (of $12,600 per additional life birth for the healthcare system). Such an intervention could be considered efficient compared to the usual standard of care, but studies are needed to assess the willingness to pay of stakeholders for this type of intervention.

scholarly journals Effects of technology-enabled blood pressure monitoring in primary care: A quasi-experimental trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2110317
Author(s):  
Valerie HY Teo ◽  
Sok Huang Teo ◽  
Sarah M Burkill ◽  
Yi Wang ◽  
Evelyn AL Chew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Health Care Team ◽  
Home Blood Pressure ◽  
Quasi Experimental

Introduction Technology to enhance hypertension management is increasingly used in primary care; however, it has not been evaluated in an Asian primary care setting. We aimed to understand the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of a technology-enabled home blood pressure monitor when deployed in primary care, and patients’ perspectives about the technology. Methods A quasi-experimental cohort study was conducted in a polyclinic in Singapore. In total, 120 patients with hypertension were assigned to the telemonitoring intervention group. Patients received a home blood pressure device connected to the clinical care team's dashboard through a mobile gateway. Tele-consultations and nurse-led tele-support were carried out using established clinical protocols. In total, 120 patients assigned to the control group continued to receive usual care in the polyclinic. Clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction were measured 6 months after recruitment. Results In total, 217 patients completed 6 months of follow-up. Telemonitoring intervention patients had significantly increased odds of having controlled blood pressure by a factor of 2.69 ( p = 0.01), with the greatest improvement in those whose blood pressure was uncontrolled at baseline ( p < 0.05). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for all patients was S$23,935.14/quality-adjusted life year (<1 gross domestic product per capita), which was very cost-effective based on World Health Organization cost-effectiveness thresholds. There was greater satisfaction in telemonitoring intervention group relating to the convenience of recording and sharing blood pressure measurements with the health care team, consultation advice received, understanding by the health care team of their condition, and were more motivated to monitor their blood pressure. Discussion Telemonitoring with tele-consultation improved blood pressure control and was more cost-effective than usual care. Patients receiving telemonitoring intervention were also more motivated and satisfied with their care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document