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.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a patient-centred approach to managing multimorbidity in primary care: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e030110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Thorn ◽  
Mei-See Man ◽  
Katherine Chaplin ◽  
Peter Bower ◽  
Sara Brookes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
The Cost

ObjectivePatients with multiple chronic health conditions are often managed in a disjointed fashion in primary care, with annual review clinic appointments offered separately for each condition. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of the 3D intervention, which was developed to improve the system of care.DesignEconomic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial.SettingGeneral practices in three centres in England and Scotland.Participants797 adults with three or more chronic conditions were randomised to the 3D intervention, while 749 participants were randomised to receive usual care.InterventionThe 3D approach: comprehensive 6-monthly general practitioner consultations, supported by medication reviews and nurse appointments.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary economic evaluation assessed the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS). Costs were related to changes in a range of secondary outcomes (QALYs accrued by both participants and carers, and deaths) in a cost–consequences analysis from the perspectives of the NHS/PSS, patients/carers and productivity losses.ResultsVery small increases were found in both QALYs (adjusted mean difference 0.007 (−0.009 to 0.023)) and costs (adjusted mean difference £126 (£−739 to £991)) in the intervention arm compared with usual care after 15 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £18 499, with a 50.8% chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY (55.8% at £30 000 per QALY).ConclusionsThe small differences in costs and outcomes were consistent with chance, and the uncertainty was substantial; therefore, the evidence for the cost-effectiveness of the 3D approach from the NHS/PSS perspective should be considered equivocal.Trial registration numberISCRTN06180958

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from the Danish ‘TeleCare North’ cluster-randomised trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. e014616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flemming Witt Udsen ◽  
Pernille Heyckendorff Lilholt ◽  
Ole Hejlesen ◽  
Lars Ehlers
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

ObjectivesTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealthcare solution in addition to usual care compared with usual care.DesignA 12-month cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a cluster-randomised trial.SettingCommunity-based setting in the geographical area of North Denmark Region in Denmark.Participants26 municipality districts define randomisation clusters with 13 districts in each arm. 1225 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were enrolled, of which 578 patients were randomised to telehealthcare and 647 to usual care.InterventionsIn addition to usual care, patients in the intervention group received a set of telehealthcare equipment and were monitored by a municipality-based healthcare team. Patients in the control group received usual care.Main outcome measureIncremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years gained from baseline up to 12 months follow-up.ResultsFrom a healthcare and social sector perspective, the adjusted mean difference in total costs between telehealthcare and usual care was €728 (95% CI −754 to 2211) and the adjusted mean difference in quality-adjusted life-years gained was 0.0132 (95% CI −0.0083 to 0.0346). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €55 327 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Decision-makers should be willing to pay more than €55 000 to achieve a probability of cost-effectiveness >50%. This conclusion is robust to changes in the definition of hospital contacts and reduced intervention costs. Only in the most optimistic scenario combining the effects of all sensitivity analyses, does the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below the UK thresholds values (€21 068 per quality-adjusted life-year).ConclusionsTelehealthcare is unlikely to be a cost-effective addition to usual care, if it is offered to all patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and if the willingness-to-pay threshold values from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are applied.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT01984840, 14 November 2013.

scholarly journals Reducing shoulder complaints in employees with high occupational shoulder exposures: study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled study (The Shoulder-Café Study)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanette Trøstrup ◽  
Lone Ramer Mikkelsen ◽  
Poul Frost ◽  
Annett Dalbøge ◽  
Mette Terp Høybye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: In Denmark, exercise therapy in combination with work modifications is the first choice treatment for persons with shoulder complaints and high occupational shoulder exposures. To obtain this treatment they must visit several healthcare providers, which makes usual care fragmented and uncoordinated. Therefore, we developed a new intervention which unifies the expertise that is needed. The main hypotheses are that a group-based Shoulder-Café intervention will reduce (I) shoulder complaints and (II) occupational shoulder exposures more effectively than an individual-based Shoulder-Guidance intervention (active control – enhanced usual care). Methods: A cluster-randomised trial is conducted including 120 employees with high occupational shoulder exposures. Companies (clusters) are randomised to either Shoulder-Café or Shoulder-Guidance with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Participants are 18–65 years old and have an Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) ≤ 40. Both interventions include a home-based shoulder exercise programme, assessment of shoulder exposures by technical measurements and self-report, and general information on how to reduce shoulder exposures. The Shoulder-Café course also includes three café meetings with physiotherapist-supervised exercises, clinical shoulder evaluation, education on shoulder anatomy, workplace-oriented counselling, and an opportunity for a workplace visit by a health and safety consultant. The primary outcomes are the OSS at 6 month follow-up (hypothesis I), and the mean number of minutes/day with the arm elevated > 60° shortly after end of intervention (hypothesis II). We will use mixed model analysis that allows for company clustering, and data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: Persons with shoulder complaints and high occupational shoulder exposures are an obvious target group for secondary prevention efforts. We developed the Shoulder-Café to reduce shoulder complaints and shoulder exposures while unifying the expertise that is needed to evaluate and treat shoulder complaints. If the intervention is effective, it would warrant widespread implementation. Trial registration: The trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on 18 May 2017 (ID: NCT03159910). Keywords: Exercise, Intervention, Mechanical exposure, Occupation, Randomised controlled trial, Shoulder, Training programme.

scholarly journals Guideline-based stepped and collaborative care for patients with depression in a cluster-randomised trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Härter ◽  
Birgit Watzke ◽  
Anne Daubmann ◽  
Karl Wegscheider ◽  
Hans-Helmut König ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Care ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document