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.

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.

Economic evaluation of compression stockings for the prevention of venous leg ulcer recurrence in Ontario

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandjar Djalalov ◽  
Shayan Sehatzadeh ◽  
David H Keast ◽  
William WL Wong
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Ulcer Recurrence ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Compression Stockings ◽  
Old Patients ◽  
Life Years

Objective: Approximately between 1.5 and 3.0 per 1000 people are affected by venous leg ulcers (VLUs). The treatment and management of VLUs is costly and recurrence is a major concern. There is evidence that compression stockings can reduce the rate of re-ulceration compared with no compression. We present the first cost-effective analysis of compression stockings in preventing recurrence of VLUs from the perspective of the Ontario healthcare system. Method: A cost-utility analysis with a five-year time horizon was conducted. Use of compression stockings was compared with usual care (no compression stockings). We simulated a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old patients with healed VLUs, using a state-transition model. Model input parameters were obtained mainly from the published literature. We estimated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and direct medical costs. We conducted various sensitivity analyses. Results: Compared with usual care, compression stockings were associated with higher costs and increased QALYs. Cost-utility analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of compression stockings was $23,864 per QALY gained compared with no compression stockings. The most influential drivers of cost-effectiveness were the utility value of healed VLUs, cost of stockings, number of stocking replacements, monthly prevention cost and the risk of VLU recurrence. Conclusion: Compared with usual care, compression stockings were cost-effective in preventing VLUs, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000. These observations were consistent even when uncertainty in model inputs and parameters were considered.

scholarly journals Blood pressure telemonitoring and remote counseling in uncontrolled hypertension

2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-40
Author(s):  
Mikhail V. Ionov ◽  
Olga V. Zhukova ◽  
Nadezhda E. Zvartau ◽  
Alexandra O. Konradi
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Predictive Modeling ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Uncontrolled Hypertension ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cardiovascular Morbidity And Mortality

Telehealth is a useful adjunct in hypertension (HTN) management. Despite obvious short-term clinical benefit, long-term social impact and cost-effectiveness have not been fully investigated. Aim. Predictive modeling of long-term clinical and social outcomes and the cost-effectiveness analysis of blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring and remote counseling (BPTM) in patients with HTN. Materials and methods. A Markov cohort-based (1000 patients in each study arm) model was developed and adopted a 10-year time horizon with 12-month time cycles. Cost and outcome data collected from the three-month study of 240 patients (160 in BPTM group and 80 controls, 48 y.o.). All patients started at a non-complicated HTN well state with a certain possibility of disease progression in a number of health states over a discrete time period. BPTM was compared with usual care in terms of 10-year healthcare costs, quality adjusted life years (QALY) using a Ministry of Health of Russian Federation perspective. Results. In the long-term run when compared with usual care BPTM was more effective in terms mortality (67 versus 91 patients lost and 9.6 versus 9.71 life years gained) and costs (cost of illness 102 508 000 RUR versus 145 237 700 RUR). Taking quality of life measures into account, the effect of BPTM was also more pronounced (8.31 versus 7.82 QALYs gained). The resultant incremental cost-utility ratio for BPTM was 275 178.98 RUR/1 QALY gained/1 patient (134 837.70 RUR/0.49 QALY/1 patient). Conclusion. According to the results of predictive modeling, implementation of BPTM into clinical practice is likely lead to reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in a cost-effective way.

Economic rationale on the use of m-Health in uncontrolled hypertensive outpatients: from three months and beyond

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Ionov ◽  
O.V Zhukova ◽  
N.E Zvartau ◽  
A.O Konradi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cardiovascular Morbidity And Mortality

Abstract Background/Introduction Current scientific data show that blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring with/without additional counseling is rather effective in hypertension (HTN) management. However, cost-effectiveness and long-term social sequelae are lacking. This is because of diverse technologies and economic climate which make results highly heterogeneous across countries. Purpose To construct predictive model of long-term outcomes and to conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis of BP telemonitoring and remote counseling (BPTM) using m-Health in Russian population of outpatients with HTN. Methods Total of 240 patients were randomized (2:1) to either BPTM (n=160, mean age 47 y.o.) and to usual care (UC, n=80, mean age 49 y.o.) with baseline, three-month follow-up clinic visits combined with ambulatory BP measurement (ABPM). BPTM consisted of m-Health tool for patients, desktop module for clinicians. It enables BP data transfer and analysis, secure web chatting to support and counsel. Main outcomes were change in office, ambulatory systolic (S) BP and rate of BP control. A Markov cohort-based (1000 patients per study arm) model was developed and adopted a 10-year time horizon with 12-month time cycles. All patients started at a non-complicated HTN “well” state with a certain possibility of disease progression in a number of health states over a discrete time period. BPTM was compared with usual care in terms of 10-year healthcare costs, quality adjusted life years (QALY) using a Ministry of Health of Russian Federation perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) represented economic analysis. Results BPTM was associated with steeper decrease in office, ambulatory SBP (−16,8 mm Hg and −8,9 mm Hg, respectively; p<0,05) with the same treatment intensity (2,4 drugs per patient). There were 102 (64%) and 11 (14%) patients with fully controlled HTN in BPTM and UC groups, respectively (OR 11,03 95% CI [5,4–22,5]). An ICER of BPTM resulted in additional 11,1 EUR/1 mm Hg/year. It is expected that BPTM will be at least 76% cost-effective as per relevant Russian willingness-to-pay threshold. In a modelled 10-year period BPTM was life-saving (9,71 vs 9,6 life years gained) and cheap (cost of illness 1,5 mln vs 2,1 mln EUR). BPTM was also more valuable (8,31 versus 7,82 QALYs gained) so the ICUR was 3601,47 EUR/QALY gained. Cost-effectiveness was further confirmed by one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis. Conclusion BPTM seems to be clinically and economically effective when implemented into clinical practice. It provides greater BP reduction, improves BP control short-term. In a long-term it is likely to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in a cost-effective way. Larger randomized studies are needed to confirm these pilot results. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Foundation. Main funding source(s): The Russian Scientific Foundation

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 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 Bayesian Regression Model for a Cost-Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comparing Punch Grafting Versus Usual Care for the Treatment of Chronic Wounds

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Selva-Sevilla ◽  
Elena Conde-Montero ◽  
Manuel Gerónimo-Pardo
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Chronic Wounds ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Bayesian Regression ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years

Punch grafting is a traditional technique used to promote epithelialization of hard-to-heal wounds. The main purpose of this observational study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis (CUA) and a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing punch grafting (n = 46) with usual care (n = 34) for the treatment of chronic wounds in an outpatient specialized wound clinic from a public healthcare system perspective (Spanish National Health system) with a three-month time horizon. CUA outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) calculated from EuroQoL-5D, whereas CEA outcome was wound-free period. One-way sensitivity analyses, extreme scenario analysis, and re-analysis by subgroups were conducted to fight against uncertainty. Bayesian regression models were built to explore whether differences between groups in costs, wound-free period, and QALYs could be explained by other variables different to treatment. As main results, punch grafting was associated with a reduction of 37% in costs compared to usual care, whereas mean incremental utility (0.02 ± 0.03 QALYs) and mean incremental effectiveness (7.18 ± 5.30 days free of wound) were favorable to punch grafting. All sensitivity analyses proved the robustness of our models. To conclude, punch grafting is the dominant alternative over usual care because it is cheaper and its utility and effectiveness are greater.

scholarly journals Is telehealthcare for heart failure patients cost-effective? An economic evaluation alongside the Danish TeleCare North heart failure trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e031670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Sig Vestergaard ◽  
Louise Hansen ◽  
Sabrina Storgaard Sørensen ◽  
Morten Berg Jensen ◽  
Lars Holger Ehlers
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Care Group ◽  
Blood Pressure Monitor ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
Life Years

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare in heart failure patients as add-on to usual care.DesignA cost-utility analysis was conducted from a public payer perspective alongside the randomised controlled TeleCare North trial.SettingThe North Denmark Region, Denmark.ParticipantsThe study included 274 heart failure patients with self-reported New York Heart Association class II-IV.InterventionsPatients in the intervention group were provided with a Telekit consisting of a tablet, a digital blood pressure monitor, and a scale and were instructed to perform measurements one to two times a week. The responsibility of the education, instructions and monitoring of the heart failure (HF) patients was placed on municipality nurses trained in HF and telemonitoring. Both groups received usual care.Outcome measuresCost-effectiveness was reported as incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). A micro-costing approach was applied to evaluate the derived savings in the first year in the public health sector. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained were estimated using the EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels questionnaire at baseline and at a 1-year follow-up.ResultsData for 274 patients were included in the main analysis. The telehealthcare solution provided a positive incremental NMB of £5164. The 1-year adjusted QALY difference between the telehealthcare solution and the usual care group was 0.0034 (95% CI: −0.0711 to 0.0780). The adjusted difference in costs was -£5096 (95% CI: −8736 to −1456) corresponding to a reduction in total healthcare costs by 35%. All sensitivity analyses showed the main results were robust.ConclusionsThe TeleCare North solution for monitoring HF was highly cost-effective. There were significant cost savings on hospitalisations, primary care contacts and total costs.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02860013.

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document