scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of an 8-week supervised education and exercise therapy programme for knee and hip osteoarthritis: a pre–post analysis of 16 255 patients participating in Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D)

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e049541
Author(s):  
Dorte T Grønne ◽  
Ewa M Roos ◽  
Rikke Ibsen ◽  
Jakob Kjellberg ◽  
Søren T Skou
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Good Life ◽  
Hip Osteoarthritis ◽  
Exercise Programme ◽  
Estimating Equation ◽  
Symptomatic Knee

ObjectivesTo evaluate 1-year cost-effectiveness of an 8-week supervised education and exercise programme delivered in primary care to patients with symptomatic knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA).DesignA registry-based pre–post study linking patient-level data from the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) registry to national registries in Denmark.Setting and participants16 255 patients with symptomatic knee or hip OA attending GLA:D.InterventionGLA:D is a structured supervised patient education and exercise programme delivered by certified physiotherapists and implemented in Denmark.Outcome measuresAdjusted healthcare costs per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained from baseline to 1 year (ratio of change in healthcare costs to change in EuroQoL 5-Dimensions 5-Level questionnaire (EQ-5D)). All adjusted measures were estimated using a generalised estimating equation gamma regression model for repeated measures. Missing data on EQ-5D were imputed with Multiple Imputations (3 months: 23%; 1 year: 39 %).ResultsAdjusted change in healthcare cost was 298€ (95% CI: 206 to 419) and 640€ (95% CI: 400 to 1009) and change in EQ-5D was 0.035 (95% CI: 0.033 to 0.037) and 0.028 (95% CI: 0.025 to 0.032) for knee and hip patients, respectively. Hence estimated adjusted healthcare costs per QALY gained was 8497€ (95% CI: 6242 to 11 324) for knee and 22 568€ (95% CI: 16 000 to 31 531) for hip patients. In patients with high compliance, the adjusted healthcare costs per QALY gained was 5438€ (95% CI: 2758 to 9231) for knee and 17 330€ (95% CI: 10 041 to 29 364) for hip patients. Healthcare costs per QALY were below conventional thresholds for willingness-to-pay at 22 804€ (20 000£) and 43 979€ (US$50 000), except the upper limit of the 95% CI for hip patients which was in between the two thresholds.ConclusionsA structured 8-week supervised education and exercise programme delivered in primary care was cost-effective at 1 year in patients with knee or hip OA supporting large-scale implementation in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a stepwise cardiometabolic disease prevention program: results of a randomized controlled trial in primary care

BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daphne M. Stol ◽  
Eelco A. B. Over ◽  
Ilse F. Badenbroek ◽  
Monika Hollander ◽  
Mark M. J. Nielen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Prevention Program ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group

Abstract Background Cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) are the major cause of death worldwide and are associated with a lower quality of life and high healthcare costs. To prevent a further rise in CMD and related healthcare costs, early detection and adequate management of individuals at risk could be an effective preventive strategy. The objective of this study was to determine long-term cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment followed by individualized treatment if indicated compared to care as usual. A computer-based simulation model was used to project long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness, assuming the prevention program was implemented in Dutch primary care. Methods A randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting in which 1934 participants aged 45–70 years without recorded CMD or CMD risk factors participated. The intervention group was invited for stepwise CMD risk assessment through a risk score (step 1), additional risk assessment at the practice in case of increased risk (step 2) and individualized follow-up treatment if indicated (step 3). The control group was not invited for risk assessment, but completed a health questionnaire. Results of the effectiveness analysis on systolic blood pressure (− 2.26 mmHg; 95% CI − 4.01: − 0.51) and total cholesterol (− 0.15 mmol/l; 95% CI − 0.23: − 0.07) were used in this analysis. Outcome measures were the costs and benefits after 1-year follow-up and long-term (60 years) cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment compared to no assessment. A computer-based simulation model was used that included data on disability weights associated with age and disease outcomes related to CMD. Analyses were performed taking a healthcare perspective. Results After 1 year, the average costs in the intervention group were 260 Euro higher than in the control group and differences were mainly driven by healthcare costs. No meaningful change was found in EQ 5D-based quality of life between the intervention and control groups after 1-year follow-up (− 0.0154; 95% CI − 0.029: 0.004). After 60 years, cumulative costs of the intervention were 41.4 million Euro and 135 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were gained. Despite improvements in blood pressure and cholesterol, the intervention was not cost-effective (ICER of 306,000 Euro/QALY after 60 years). Scenario analyses did not allow for a change in conclusions with regard to cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Conclusions Implementation of this primary care-based CMD prevention program is not cost-effective in the long term. Implementation of this program in primary care cannot be recommended. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register NTR4277, registered on 26 November 2013

scholarly journals The (cost-)effectiveness and cost-utility of a novel integrative care initiative for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: the pragmatic trial protocol of Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Lamper ◽  
Ivan PJ Huijnen ◽  
Mariëlle EJB Goossens ◽  
Bjorn Winkens ◽  
Dirk Ruwaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Local Networks ◽  
Quadruple Aim ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Rehabilitation care for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is not optimally organized. The Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg 2.0 (NPRL2.0) provides integrated care with a biopsychosocial approach and strives to improve the Quadruple Aim outcomes: pain-related disability of patients with CMP; experiences of care of patients with CMP; meaning in the work of healthcare professionals; and healthcare costs. Firstly, in this study, the effectiveness (with regard to the functioning and participation of patients) of primary care for patients with CMP will be assessed, comparing care organized following the NPRL2.0 procedure with usual care. Secondly, the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility with regard to health-related quality of life and healthcare costs will be assessed. And thirdly, the effect of duration of participation in a local network in primary care will be studied. Methods: In this pragmatic study, it is expected that two local networks with 105 patients will participate in the prospective cohort study and six local networks with 184 patients in the stepped-wedge based design. Healthcare professionals in the local networks will recruit patients. Inclusion criteria: age ≥ 18 years; having CMP; willing to improve functioning despite pain; and adequate Dutch literacy. Exclusion criteria: pregnancy; and having a treatable medical or psychiatric disease. Patients will complete questionnaires at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2), 6 months (T3), and 9 months (T4). Questionnaires at T1 and T4 will include the Pain Disability Index and Short Form Health Survey. Questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4 will include the EQ-5D-5L, and iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Cost Questionnaires. Outcomes will be compared using linear mixed-model analysis and costs will be compared using bootstrapping methods. Discussion: NPRL2.0 is a multidimensional, complex intervention, executed in daily practice, and therefore needing a pragmatic study design. The current study will assess NPRL2.0 with respect to the Quadruple Aim outcomes: patient health and costs. This will provide more information on the (cost-) effectiveness of the organization of care in a network structure regarding patients with CMP. The other two Quadruple Aim outcomes will be examined alongside this study. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register: NL7643

scholarly journals The (cost-)effectiveness and cost-utility of a novel integrative care initiative for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: the pragmatic trial protocol of Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Lamper ◽  
Ivan PJ Huijnen ◽  
Mariëlle EJB Goossens ◽  
Bjorn Winkens ◽  
Dirk Ruwaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Local Networks ◽  
Quadruple Aim ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Rehabilitation care for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is not optimally organized. The Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg 2.0 (NPRL2.0) provides integrated care with a biopsychosocial approach and strives to improve the Quadruple Aim outcomes: pain-related disability of patients with CMP; experiences of care of patients with CMP; meaning in the work of healthcare professionals; and healthcare costs. Firstly, in this study, the effectiveness (with regard to the functioning and participation of patients) of primary care for patients with CMP will be assessed, comparing care organized following the NPRL2.0 procedure with usual care. Secondly, the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility with regard to health-related quality of life and healthcare costs will be assessed. And thirdly, the effect of duration of participation in a local network in primary care will be studied. Methods: In this pragmatic study, it is expected that two local networks with 105 patients will participate in the prospective cohort study and six local networks with 184 patients in the stepped-wedge based design. Healthcare professionals in the local networks will recruit patients. Inclusion criteria: age ≥ 18 years; having CMP; willing to improve functioning despite pain; and adequate Dutch literacy. Exclusion criteria: pregnancy; and having a treatable medical or psychiatric disease. Patients will complete questionnaires at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2), 6 months (T3), and 9 months (T4). Questionnaires at T1 and T4 will include the Pain Disability Index and Short Form Health Survey. Questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4 will include the EQ-5D-5L, and iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Cost Questionnaires. Outcomes will be compared using linear mixed-model analysis and costs will be compared using bootstrapping methods. Discussion: NPRL2.0 is a multidimensional, complex intervention, executed in daily practice, and therefore needing a pragmatic study design. The current study will assess the NPRL2.0 with respect to the Quadruple Aim’s outcomes of effectiveness of healthcare and economic consequences. The other two Quadruple Aim outcomes will be examined alongside this study, providing a broad scope of the performance of NPRL2.0. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register: NL7643; Registered 5 April 2019. https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7643

scholarly journals The (cost-)effectiveness and cost-utility of a novel integrative care initiative for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: the pragmatic trial protocol of Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Lamper ◽  
Ivan P. J. Huijnen ◽  
Mariëlle E. J. B. Goossens ◽  
Bjorn Winkens ◽  
Dirk Ruwaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Local Networks ◽  
Quadruple Aim ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Rehabilitation care for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is not optimally organized. The Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg 2.0 (NPRL2.0) provides integrated care with a biopsychosocial approach and strives to improve the Quadruple Aim outcomes: pain-related disability of patients with CMP; experiences of care of patients with CMP; meaning in the work of healthcare professionals; and healthcare costs. Firstly, in this study, the effectiveness (with regard to the functioning and participation of patients) of primary care for patients with CMP will be assessed, comparing care organized following the NPRL2.0 procedure with usual care. Secondly, the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility with regard to health-related quality of life and healthcare costs will be assessed. And thirdly, the effect of duration of participation in a local network in primary care will be studied. Methods In this pragmatic study, it is expected that two local networks with 105 patients will participate in the prospective cohort study and six local networks with 184 patients in the stepped-wedge based design. Healthcare professionals in the local networks will recruit patients. Inclusion criteria: age ≥ 18 years; having CMP; willing to improve functioning despite pain; and adequate Dutch literacy. Exclusion criteria: pregnancy; and having a treatable medical or psychiatric disease. Patients will complete questionnaires at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2), 6 months (T3), and 9 months (T4). Questionnaires at T1 and T4 will include the Pain Disability Index and Short Form Health Survey. Questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4 will include the EQ-5D-5L, and iMTA Medical Consumption and Productivity Cost Questionnaires. Outcomes will be compared using linear mixed-model analysis and costs will be compared using bootstrapping methods. Discussion NPRL2.0 is a multidimensional, complex intervention, executed in daily practice, and therefore needing a pragmatic study design. The current study will assess NPRL2.0 with respect to the Quadruple Aim outcomes: patient health and costs. This will provide more information on the (cost-) effectiveness of the organization of care in a network structure regarding patients with CMP. The other two Quadruple Aim outcomes will be examined alongside this study. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register: NL7643. https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7643.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of different post-diagnostic dementia care models delivered by primary care: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (695) ◽  
pp. e434-e441
Author(s):  
Rachael Frost ◽  
Kate Walters ◽  
Su Aw ◽  
Greta Brunskill ◽  
Jane Wilcock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Dementia Care ◽  
Care Models ◽  
Memory Clinics ◽  
Partnership Models ◽  
With Memory

BackgroundGlobal policy recommendations suggest a task-shifted model of post-diagnostic dementia care, moving towards primary and community-based care. It is unclear how this may best be delivered.AimTo assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary care-based models of post-diagnostic dementia care.Design and settingA systematic review of trials and economic evaluations of post-diagnostic dementia care interventions where primary care was substantially involved in care plan decision making.MethodSearches were undertaken of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL (from inception to March 2019). Two authors independently critically appraised studies and inductively classified interventions into types of care models. Random effects meta-analysis or narrative synthesis was conducted for each model where appropriate.ResultsFrom 4506 unique references and 357 full texts, 23 papers were included from 10 trials of nine interventions, delivered in four countries. Four types of care models were identified. Primary care provider (PCP)-led care (n = 1) led to better caregiver mental health and reduced hospital and memory clinic costs compared with memory clinics. PCP-led care with specialist consulting support (n = 2) did not have additional effects on clinical outcomes or costs over usual primary care. PCP–case management partnership models (n = 6) offered the most promise, with impact on neuropsychiatric symptoms, caregiver burden, distress and mastery, and healthcare costs. Integrated primary care memory clinics (n = 1) had limited evidence for improved quality of life and cost-effectiveness compared with memory clinics.ConclusionPartnership models may impact on some clinical outcomes and healthcare costs. More rigorous evaluation of promising primary care-led care models is needed.

1306-P: Cost Effectiveness of Point-of-Care HbA1c in Primary Care Setting in Brazil

Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1306-P
Author(s):  
DANIELLE S. MEDEIROS ◽  
LORENA S. ROSA ◽  
SOSTENES MISTRO ◽  
CLAVDIA N. KOCHERGIN ◽  
DANIELA A. SOARES ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Primary Care Setting ◽  
Point Of Care

scholarly journals IMPROVING SYSTEM READINESS, STAFF PREPAREDNESS AND PATIENT SAFETY IN A NEW SINGLE FAMILY ROOM NICU THROUGH IN SITU SIMULATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. e16-e16
Author(s):  
Ahmed Moussa ◽  
Audrey Larone-Juneau ◽  
Laura Fazilleau ◽  
Marie-Eve Rochon ◽  
Justine Giroux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Single Family ◽  
In Situ Simulation ◽  
Ensure Patient Safety ◽  
System Readiness ◽  
Dependent Samples

Abstract BACKGROUND Transitions to new healthcare environments can negatively impact patient care and threaten patient safety. Immersive in situ simulation conducted in newly constructed single family room (SFR) Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) prior to occupancy, has been shown to be effective in testing new environments and identifying latent safety threats (LSTs). These simulations overlay human factors to identify LSTs as new and existing process and systems are implemented in the new environment OBJECTIVES We aimed to demonstrate that large-scale, immersive, in situ simulation prior to the transition to a new SFR NICU improves: 1) systems readiness, 2) staff preparedness, 3) patient safety, 4) staff comfort with simulation, and 5) staff attitude towards culture change. DESIGN/METHODS Multidisciplinary teams of neonatal healthcare providers (HCP) and parents of former NICU patients participated in large-scale, immersive in-situ simulations conducted in the new NICU prior to occupancy. One eighth of the NICU was outfitted with equipment and mannequins and staff performed in their native roles. Multidisciplinary debriefings, which included parents, were conducted immediately after simulations to identify LSTs. Through an iterative process issues were resolved and additional simulations conducted. Debriefings were documented and debriefing transcripts transcribed and LSTs classified using qualitative methods. To assess systems readiness and staff preparedness for transition into the new NICU, HCPs completed surveys prior to transition, post-simulation and post-transition. Systems readiness and staff preparedness were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Average survey responses were analyzed using dependent samples t-tests and repeated measures ANOVAs. RESULTS One hundred eight HCPs and 24 parents participated in six half-day simulation sessions. A total of 75 LSTs were identified and were categorized into eight themes: 1) work organization, 2) orientation and parent wayfinding, 3) communication devices/systems, 4) nursing and resuscitation equipment, 5) ergonomics, 6) parent comfort; 7) work processes, and 8) interdepartmental interactions. Prior to the transition to the new NICU, 76% of the LSTs were resolved. Survey response rate was 31%, 16%, 7% for baseline, post-simulation and post-move surveys, respectively. System readiness at baseline was 1.3/5,. Post-simulation systems readiness was 3.5/5 (p = 0.0001) and post-transition was 3.9/5 (p = 0.02). Staff preparedness at baseline was 1.4/5. Staff preparedness post-simulation was 3.3/5 (p = 0.006) and post-transition was 3.9/5 (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION Large-scale, immersive in situ simulation is a feasible and effective methodology for identifying LSTs, improving systems readiness and staff preparedness in a new SFR NICU prior to occupancy. However, to optimize patient safety, identified LSTs must be mitigated prior to occupancy. Coordinating large-scale simulations is worth the time and cost investment necessary to optimize systems and ensure patient safety prior to transition to a new SFR NICU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document