scholarly journals A cost utility analysis alongside a cluster-randomised trial evaluating a minor ailment service compared to usual care in community pharmacy

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Noelia Amador-Fernández ◽  
Shalom I. Benrimoj ◽  
Leticia García-Mochón ◽  
Victoria García-Cárdenas ◽  
Sarah Dineen-Griffin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Direct Product ◽  
Prescription Medication ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Symptom Presentation ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Minor Ailments ◽  
A Minor

Abstract Background Minor ailments are “self-limiting conditions which may be diagnosed and managed without a medical intervention”. A cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) was designed to evaluate the clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes of a Minor Ailment Service (MAS) in community pharmacy (CP) compared with usual care (UC). Methods The cRCT was conducted for 6 months from December 2017. The pharmacist-patient intervention consisted of a standardised face-to-face consultation on a web-based program using co-developed protocols, pharmacists’ training, practice change facilitators and patients’ educational material. Patients requesting a non-prescription medication (direct product request) or presenting minor ailments received MAS or UC and were followed-up by telephone 10-days after the consultation. The primary economic outcomes were incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of the service and health related quality of life (HRQoL). Total costs included health system, CPs and patient direct costs: health professionals’ consultation time, medication costs, pharmacists’ training costs, investment of the pharmacy and consultation costs within the 10 days following the initial consultation. The HRQoL was obtained using the EuroQoL 5D-5L at the time of the consultation and at 10-days follow up. A sensitivity analysis was carried out using bootstrapping. There were two sub-group analyses undertaken, for symptom presentation and direct product requests, to evaluate possible differences. Results A total of 808 patients (323 MAS and 485 UC) were recruited in 27 CPs with 42 pharmacists (20 MAS and 22 UC). 64.7% (n = 523) of patients responded to follow-up after their consultation in CP. MAS patients gained an additional 0.0003 QALYs (p = 0.053). When considering only MAS patients presenting with symptoms, the ICUR was 24,733€/QALY with a 47.4% probability of cost-effectiveness (willingness to pay of 25,000€/QALY). Although when considering patients presenting for a direct product request, MAS was the dominant strategy with a 93.69% probability of cost-effectiveness. Conclusions Expanding community pharmacists’ scope through MAS may benefit health systems. To be fully cost effective, MAS should not only include consultations arising from symptom presentation but also include an oversight of self-selected products by patients. MAS increase patient safety through the appropriate use of non-prescription medication and through the direct referral of patients to GP. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN17235323. Registered 07/05/2021 - Retrospectively registered

scholarly journals A Cost Utility Analysis Alongside a Cluster Randomised Trial Evaluating a Minor Ailment Service Compared to Usual Care in Community Pharmacy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noelia Amador-Fernández ◽  
Shalom I. Benrimoj ◽  
Leticia García-Mochón ◽  
Victoria García-Cárdenas ◽  
Sarah Dineen-Griffin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Direct Product ◽  
Prescription Medication ◽  
Ethics Committee ◽  
Symptom Presentation ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Minor Ailments ◽  
A Minor

Abstract Background Minor ailments are “self-limiting conditions which may be diagnosed and managed without a medical intervention”. A cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) was designed to evaluate the clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes of a Minor Ailment Service (MAS) in community pharmacy (CP) compared with usual care (UC). Methods The cRCT was conducted for six months from December 2017. The pharmacist-patient intervention consisted of a standardised face-to-face consultation on a web-based program using co-developed protocols, pharmacists’ training, practice change facilitators and patients’ educational material. Patients requesting a non-prescription medication (direct product request) or presenting minor ailments received MAS or UC and were followed-up by telephone 10-days after the consultation. The primary economic outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the service and health related quality of life (HRQoL). Total costs included health system, CPs and patient direct costs: health professionals’ consultation time, medication costs, pharmacists’ training costs, investment of the pharmacy and consultation costs within the ten days following the initial consultation. The HRQoL was obtained using the EuroQoL 5D-5L at the time of the consultation and at 10-days follow up. A sensitivity analysis was carried out using bootstrapping. There were two sub-group analyses undertaken, for symptom presentation and direct product requests, to evaluate possible differences.Results A total of 808 patients (323 MAS and 485 UC) were recruited in 27 CPs with 42 pharmacists (20 MAS and 22 UC). 64.7% (n=523) of patients responded to follow-up after their consultation in CP. MAS patients gained an additional 0.0003 QALYs (p=0.053). When considering only MAS patients presenting with symptoms, the ICER was 24,733€/QALY with a 47.4% probability of cost-effectiveness (willingness to pay of 25,000€/QALY). Although when considering patients presenting for a direct product request, MAS was the dominant strategy with a 93.69% probability of cost-effectiveness.Conclusions Expanding community pharmacists’ scope through MAS may benefit health systems. To be fully cost effective, MAS should not only include consultations arising from symptom presentation but also include an oversight of self-selected products by patients. MAS increase patient safety through the appropriate use of non-prescription medication and through the direct referral of patients to GP.Trial registrationThe study was not registered but it was approved by the University of Granada Ethics Committee (approval number 331/CEIH/2017) and Xátiva-Ontinyent Ethics Committee “Lluís Alcanyís”.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of an internet-based perioperative care programme to enhance postoperative recovery in gynaecological patients: economic evaluation alongside a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e017782
Author(s):  
Esther V A Bouwsma ◽  
Judith E Bosmans ◽  
Johanna M van Dongen ◽  
Hans A M Brölmann ◽  
Johannes R Anema ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Perioperative Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Stepped Wedge ◽  
Gynaecological Surgery ◽  
Care Programme ◽  
Societal Costs ◽  
Cluster Randomised

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of an internet-based perioperative care programme compared with usual care for gynaecological patients.DesignEconomic evaluation from a societal perspective alongside a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial with 12 months of follow-up.SettingSecondary care, nine hospitals in the Netherlands, 2011–2014.Participants433 employed women aged 18–65 years scheduled for a hysterectomy and/or laparoscopic adnexal surgery.InterventionThe intervention comprised an internet-based care programme aimed at improving convalescence and preventing delayed return to work (RTW) following gynaecological surgery and was sequentially rolled out. Depending on the implementation phase of their hospital, patients were allocated to usual care (n=206) or to the intervention (n=227).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was duration until full sustainable RTW. Secondary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), health-related quality of life and recovery.ResultsAt 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences in total societal costs (€−647; 95% CI €−2116 to €753) and duration until RTW (−4.1; 95% CI −10.8 to 2.6) between groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for RTW was 56; each day earlier RTW in the intervention group was associated with cost savings of €56 compared with usual care. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.79 at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €0 per day earlier RTW, which increased to 0.97 at a WTP of €76 per day earlier RTW. The difference in QALYs gained over 12 months between the groups was clinically irrelevant resulting in a low probability of cost-effectiveness for QALYs.ConclusionsConsidering that on average the costs of a day of sickness absence are €230, the care programme is considered cost-effective in comparison with usual care for duration until sustainable RTW after gynaecological surgery for benign disease. Future research should indicate whether widespread implementation of this care programme has the potential to reduce societal costs associated with gynaecological surgery.Trial registration numberNTR2933; Results.

scholarly journals The 3-Year Cost-Effectiveness of a Nurse-Based Case Management versus Usual Care for Elderly Patients with Myocardial Infarction: Results from the KORINNA Follow-Up Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hildegard Seidl ◽  
Matthias Hunger ◽  
Christa Meisinger ◽  
Inge Kirchberger ◽  
Bernhard Kuch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Follow Up Study

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 Long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care (versus usual care) for people with mental–physical multimorbidity: cluster-randomised trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 213 (2) ◽  
pp. 456-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M. Camacho ◽  
Linda M. Davies ◽  
Mark Hann ◽  
Nicola Small ◽  
Peter Bower ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Collaborative Care ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Life Years

BackgroundCollaborative care can support the treatment of depression in people with long-term conditions, but long-term benefits and costs are unknown.AimsTo explore the long-term (24-month) effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care in people with mental-physical multimorbidity.MethodA cluster randomised trial compared collaborative care (integrated physical and mental healthcare) with usual care for depression alongside diabetes and/or coronary heart disease. Depression symptoms were measured by the symptom checklist-depression scale (SCL-D13). The economic evaluation was from the perspective of the English National Health Service.Results191 participants were allocated to collaborative care and 196 to usual care. At 24 months, the mean SCL-D13 score was 0.27 (95% CI, −0.48 to −0.06) lower in the collaborative care group alongside a gain of 0.14 (95% CI, 0.06-0.21) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The cost per QALY gained was £13 069.ConclusionsIn the long term, collaborative care reduces depression and is potentially cost-effective at internationally accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.Declaration of interestNone.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document