scholarly journals The cost effectiveness of an early transition from hospital to nursing home for stroke patients: design of a comparative study

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron WH Heijnen ◽  
Silvia MAA Evers ◽  
Trudy DEM van der Weijden ◽  
Martien Limburg ◽  
Jos MGA Schols
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 102481
Author(s):  
Washington Cunha ◽  
Vítor Mangaravite ◽  
Christian Gomes ◽  
Sérgio Canuto ◽  
Elaine Resende ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Marin ◽  
Mateu Serra-Prat ◽  
Omar Ortega ◽  
Pere Clavé

Abstract Background and purpose: Oropharyngeal Dysphagia (OD) affects 40-81% of patients after stroke. A recent systematic review on the costs of OD and it’s main complications showed higher acute and long-term costs for those patients who developed OD, malnutrition and pneumonia after stroke. These results suggest that appropriate management of post-stroke OD could lead to reduction of clinical complications and significant cost savings. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the available literature exploring the efficiency or cost-effectiveness of available healthcare interventions on the appropriate management of OD. Methods: A systematic review on economic evaluations of health care interventions on post-stroke patients with OD following PRISMA recommendations will be performed. MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry Database will be searched and a subsequent reference check will be done. English and Spanish literature will be included without date restrictions. Studies will be included if they refer to economic evaluations or studies in which cost savings were reported in post-stroke patients suffering OD. Studies will be excluded if they are partial economic evaluation studies, if they refer to esophageal dysphagia, or if OD is caused by causes different from stroke. Evidence will be presented and synthetized with a narrative method and using tables. Quality evaluation will be done using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement. Discussion: The protocol for this systematic review is the first step to assess the cost-effectiveness of the healthcare interventions that have been described as potential treatments for post-stroke OD. This systematic review will summarize the current evidence on the relation between cost and benefits associated with the appropriate management of OD in post-stroke patients. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020136245


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e022585 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kouta Ito

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine administration of single-dose zoledronic acid for nursing home residents with osteoporosis in the USA.DesignMarkov cohort simulation model based on published literature from a healthcare sector perspective over a lifetime horizon.SettingNursing homes.ParticipantsA hypothetical cohort of nursing home residents aged 85 years with osteoporosis.InterventionsTwo strategies were compared: (1) a single intravenous dose of zoledronic acid 5 mg and (2) usual care (supplementation of calcium and vitamin D only).Primary and secondary outcome measuresIncremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), as measured by cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.ResultsCompared with usual care, zoledronic acid had an ICER of $207 400 per QALY gained and was not cost-effective at a conventional willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained. The results were robust to a reasonable range of assumptions about incidence, mortality, quality-of-life effects and the cost of hip fracture and the cost of zoledronic acid. Zoledronic acid had a potential to become cost-effective if a fracture risk reduction with zoledronic acid was higher than 23% or if 6-month mortality in nursing home residents was lower than 16%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the zoledronic acid would be cost-effective in 14%, 27% and 44% of simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50 000, $100 000 or $200 000 per QALY gained, respectively.ConclusionsRoutine administration of single-dose zoledronic acid in nursing home residents with osteoporosis is not a cost-effective use of resources in the USA but could be justifiable in those with a favourable life expectancy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1529 ◽  
pp. 032053
Author(s):  
Nestor R. Ong ◽  
Mark Edward A Llarena ◽  
Fredric Joaquin T Montesines ◽  
Jardine C Ong ◽  
Judy Ann Fatima J Revelar

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 229-229
Author(s):  
Eric Jutkowitz ◽  
Fernando Alarid-Escudero ◽  
Peter Shewmaker ◽  
Joseph Gaugler ◽  
Laura Pizzi

Abstract Although people generally want to age in their community, individuals living with dementia are likely to move to a nursing home. In randomized trials, psychosocial interventions reduce the risk of people living with dementia transitioning to a nursing home, but the cost-effectiveness of these interventions is unknown. We used an evidence-based mathematical model to simulate a place of residence (community or nursing home) for people living with dementia. Our model also predicts time caregiving, health care costs, and quality of life. We modeled the reduction in nursing home rate (i.e., hazard ratio (HR) treatment effect) identified from two trials of non-drug interventions for people living with dementia and their caregiver. Using trial data, we account for the disease stage of when interventions are implemented. Specifically, we modeled MIND (HR: 0.63; 18-month effect), an in-home intervention for people with mild-moderate dementia, and the NYU Caregiver Intervention (HR: 0.53; 42-month effect), which is for people with moderate dementia. We evaluated each intervention’s cost-effectiveness relative to usual care for the duration of the intervention from a societal perspective. The MIND and NYU Caregiver Intervention resulted in $23,900, and $6,600 costs savings relative to usual care, respectively. The model predicted an improvement in the quality of life for people living with dementia for both interventions. The largest cost saving was attributed to reductions in family nursing home spending. Medicare and Medicaid received modest cost savings but are likely to be tasked with paying for these interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document