scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management for preventing recurrent symptoms and complications in adults presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones or cholecystitis: a systematic review and economic evaluation

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (55) ◽  
pp. 1-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Brazzelli ◽  
Moira Cruickshank ◽  
Mary Kilonzo ◽  
Irfan Ahmed ◽  
Fiona Stewart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Acute Cholecystitis ◽  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Conservative Management ◽  
Gallstone Disease ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Biliary Pain ◽  
Symptomatic Gallstones ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundApproximately 10–15% of the adult population suffer from gallstone disease, cholelithiasis, with more women than men being affected. Cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for people who present with biliary pain or acute cholecystitis and evidence of gallstones. However, some people do not experience a recurrence after an initial episode of biliary pain or cholecystitis. As most of the current research focuses on the surgical management of the disease, less attention has been dedicated to the consequences of conservative management.ObjectivesTo determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management in people presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones (biliary pain) or cholecystitis.Data sourcesWe searched all major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Bioscience Information Service, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1980 to September 2012 and we contacted experts in the field.Review methodsEvidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that enrolled people with symptomatic gallstone disease (pain attacks only and/or acute cholecystitis). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Standard meta-analysis techniques were used to combine results from included studies. A de novo Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.ResultsTwo Norwegian RCTs involving 201 participants were included. Eighty-eight per cent of people randomised to surgery and 45% of people randomised to observation underwent cholecystectomy during the 14-year follow-up period. Participants randomised to observation were significantly more likely to experience gallstone-related complications [risk ratio = 6.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 28.51;p = 0.01], in particular acute cholecystitis (risk ratio = 9.55; 95% CI 1.25 to 73.27;p = 0.03), and less likely to undergo surgery (risk ratio = 0.50; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73;p = 0.0004), experience surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.81;p = 0.01) or, more specifically, minor surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.11; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.56;p = 0.008) than those randomised to surgery. Fifty-five per cent of people randomised to observation did not require an operation during the 14-year follow-up period and 12% of people randomised to cholecystectomy did not undergo the scheduled operation. The results of the economic evaluation suggest that, on average, the surgery strategy costs £1236 more per patient than the conservative management strategy but was, on average, more effective. An increase in the number of people requiring surgery while treated conservatively corresponded to a reduction in the cost-effectiveness of the conservative strategy. There was uncertainty around some of the parameters used in the economic model.ConclusionsThe results of this assessment indicate that cholecystectomy is still the treatment of choice for many symptomatic people. However, approximately half of the people in the observation group did not require surgery or suffer complications in the long term indicating that a conservative therapeutic approach may represent a valid alternative to surgery in this group of people. Owing to the dearth of current evidence in the UK setting a large, well-designed, multicentre trial is needed.Study registrationThe study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002817FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

scholarly journals Managing Small Ureteral Stones: A Retrospective Study on Follow-Up, Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Conservative Management vs. Early Surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aristeidis Alevizopoulos ◽  
Dimitrios Zosimas ◽  
Lamprini Piha ◽  
Milad Hanna ◽  
Konstantinos Charitopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Conservative Management ◽  
Ureteral Stone ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Early Surgery ◽  
Ureteral Stones ◽  
Global Cost ◽  
The Cost

Introduction: The management of ureteral calculi has evolved over the past decades with the advent of new surgical and medical treatments. The current guidelines support conservative management as a possible approach for ureteral stones sized = 10 mm. Objectives: We purport to follow the natural history of ureteral stones managed conservatively in this retrospective study, and attempt to ascribe an estimated health-care and cost-effectiveness, from presentation to time of being stone-free. Materials and methods: 192 male and female patients with a single ureteral stone sized = 10 mm were included in this study. The clinical and cost-related outcome was analyzed for different stone sizes (0-4, 4-6 and 6-10 mm). The effectiveness of selected follow-up (FU) scans was also analyzed. Results: Stone size was found to be related to the degree of hydronephrosis and to the likelihood of need for a surgical management. Conservative management was found to be clinically effective, as 88% of the patients did not require surgery for their stone. 96.1% of the patients with a stone 0-4mm managed to expel their ureteral stone. Bigger ureteral stones were found to be more costly. The cost-effectiveness of the single FU scans was found to be related to their efficiency, while the global cost-effectiveness of conservative management vs. early surgery was higher for smaller stones (26.8 vs. 17.32% for stones 0-4 vs. 6-10 mm). Conclusion: Conservative management is clinically effective with a significant cost-benefit, particularly for the subgroup of stones sized 0-4 mm, where a need for FU scans is in dispute.

scholarly journals Adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab for treating plaque psoriasis in children and young people: systematic review and economic evaluation

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (64) ◽  
pp. 1-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Duarte ◽  
Teumzghi Mebrahtu ◽  
Pedro Saramago Goncalves ◽  
Melissa Harden ◽  
Ruth Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Young People ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Biological Treatments ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Cost

Background Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease that predominantly affects the skin. Adalimumab (HUMIRA®, AbbVie, Maidenhead, UK), etanercept (Enbrel®, Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) and ustekinumab (STELARA®, Janssen Biotech, Inc., Titusville, NJ, USA) are the three biological treatments currently licensed for psoriasis in children. Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab within their respective licensed indications for the treatment of plaque psoriasis in children and young people. Data sources Searches of the literature and regulatory sources, contact with European psoriasis registries, company submissions and clinical study reports from manufacturers, and previous National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal documentation. Review methods Included studies were summarised and subjected to detailed critical appraisal. A network meta-analysis incorporating adult data was developed to connect the effectiveness data in children and young people and populate a de novo decision-analytic model. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab compared with each other and with either methotrexate or best supportive care (BSC), depending on the position of the intervention in the management pathway. Results Of the 2386 non-duplicate records identified, nine studies (one randomised controlled trial for each drug plus six observational studies) were included in the review of clinical effectiveness and safety. Etanercept and ustekinumab resulted in significantly greater improvements in psoriasis symptoms than placebo at 12 weeks’ follow-up. The magnitude and persistence of the effects beyond 12 weeks is less certain. Adalimumab resulted in significantly greater improvements in psoriasis symptoms than methotrexate for some but not all measures at 16 weeks. Quality-of-life benefits were inconsistent across different measures. There was limited evidence of excess short-term adverse events; however, the possibility of rare events cannot be excluded. The majority of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the use of biologics in children and young people exceeded NICE’s usual threshold for cost-effectiveness and were reduced significantly only when combined assumptions that align with those made in the management of psoriasis in adults were adopted. Limitations The clinical evidence base for short- and long-term outcomes was limited in terms of total participant numbers, length of follow-up and the absence of young children. Conclusions The paucity of clinical and economic evidence to inform the cost-effectiveness of biological treatments in children and young people imposed a number of strong assumptions and uncertainties. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) gains associated with treatment and the number of hospitalisations in children and young people are areas of considerable uncertainty. The findings suggest that biological treatments may not be cost-effective for the management of psoriasis in children and young people at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, unless a number of strong assumptions about HRQoL and the costs of BSC are combined. Registry data on biological treatments would help determine safety, patterns of treatment switching, impact on comorbidities and long-term withdrawal rates. Further research is also needed into the resource use and costs associated with BSC. Adequately powered randomised controlled trials (including comparisons against placebo) could substantially reduce the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of biological treatments in biologic-experienced populations of children and young people, particularly in younger children. Such trials should establish the impact of biological therapies on HRQoL in this population, ideally by collecting direct estimates of EuroQol-5 Dimensions for Youth (EQ-5D-Y) utilities. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016039494. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

447 Cost-Effectiveness of a 3-Year Tele-OSA Intervention

SLEEP ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. A177-A177
Author(s):  
Jaejin An ◽  
Dennis Hwang ◽  
Jiaxiao Shi ◽  
Amy Sawyer ◽  
Aiyu Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Apnea Hypopnea Index ◽  
Obstructive Sleep ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Introduction Trial-based tele-obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) cost-effectiveness analyses have often been inconclusive due to small sample sizes and short follow-up. In this study, we report the cost-effectiveness of Tele-OSA using a larger sample from a 3-month trial that was augmented with 2.75 additional years of epidemiologic follow-up. Methods The Tele-OSA study was a 3-month randomized trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Southern California that demonstrated improved adherence in patients receiving automated feedback messaging regarding their positive airway pressure (PAP) use when compared to usual care. At the end of the 3 months, participants in the intervention group pseudo-randomly either stopped or continued receiving messaging. This analysis included those participants who had moderate-severe OSA (Apnea Hypopnea Index >=15) and compared the cost-effectiveness of 3 groups: 1) no messaging, 2) messaging for 3 months only, and 3) messaging for 3 years. Costs were derived by multiplying medical service use from electronic medical records times costs from Federal fee schedules. Effects were average nightly hours of PAP use. We report the incremental cost per incremental hour of PAP use as well as the fraction acceptable. Results We included 256 patients with moderate-severe OSA (Group 1, n=132; Group 2, n=79; Group 3, n=45). Group 2, which received the intervention for 3 months only, had the highest costs and fewest hours of use and was dominated by the other two groups. Average 1-year costs for groups 1 and 3 were $6035 (SE, $477) and $6154 (SE, $575), respectively; average nightly hours of PAP use were 3.07 (SE, 0.23) and 4.09 (SE, 0.42). Compared to no messaging, messaging for 3 years had an incremental cost ($119, p=0.86) per incremental hour of use (1.02, p=0.03) of $117. For a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $500 per year ($1.37/night), 3-year messaging has a 70% chance of being acceptable. Conclusion Long-term Tele-OSA messaging was more effective than no messaging for PAP use outcomes but also highly likely cost-effective with an acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold. Epidemiologic evidence suggests that this greater use will yield both clinical and additional economic benefits. Support (if any) Tele-OSA study was supported by the AASM Foundation SRA Grant #: 104-SR-13

scholarly journals Lenvatinib and sorafenib for differentiated thyroid cancer after radioactive iodine: a systematic review and economic evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Fleeman ◽  
Rachel Houten ◽  
Adrian Bagust ◽  
Marty Richardson ◽  
Sophie Beale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Differentiated Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Radioactive Iodine ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Base Case ◽  
The Cost

Background Thyroid cancer is a rare cancer, accounting for only 1% of all malignancies in England and Wales. Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) accounts for ≈94% of all thyroid cancers. Patients with DTC often require treatment with radioactive iodine. Treatment for DTC that is refractory to radioactive iodine [radioactive iodine-refractory DTC (RR-DTC)] is often limited to best supportive care (BSC). Objectives We aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib (Lenvima®; Eisai Ltd, Hertfordshire, UK) and sorafenib (Nexar®; Bayer HealthCare, Leverkusen, Germany) for the treatment of patients with RR-DTC. Data sources EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and EconLit were searched (date range 1999 to 10 January 2017; searched on 10 January 2017). The bibliographies of retrieved citations were also examined. Review methods We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, prospective observational studies and economic evaluations of lenvatinib or sorafenib. In the absence of relevant economic evaluations, we constructed a de novo economic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib with that of BSC. Results Two RCTs were identified: SELECT (Study of [E7080] LEnvatinib in 131I-refractory differentiated Cancer of the Thyroid) and DECISION (StuDy of sorafEnib in loCally advanced or metastatIc patientS with radioactive Iodine-refractory thyrOid caNcer). Lenvatinib and sorafenib were both reported to improve median progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo: 18.3 months (lenvatinib) vs. 3.6 months (placebo) and 10.8 months (sorafenib) vs. 5.8 months (placebo). Patient crossover was high (≥ 75%) in both trials, confounding estimates of overall survival (OS). Using OS data adjusted for crossover, trial authors reported a statistically significant improvement in OS for patients treated with lenvatinib compared with those given placebo (SELECT) but not for patients treated with sorafenib compared with those given placebo (DECISION). Both lenvatinib and sorafenib increased the incidence of adverse events (AEs), and dose reductions were required (for > 60% of patients). The results from nine prospective observational studies and 13 systematic reviews of lenvatinib or sorafenib were broadly comparable to those from the RCTs. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) data were collected only in DECISION. We considered the feasibility of comparing lenvatinib with sorafenib via an indirect comparison but concluded that this would not be appropriate because of differences in trial and participant characteristics, risk profiles of the participants in the placebo arms and because the proportional hazard assumption was violated for five of the six survival outcomes available from the trials. In the base-case economic analysis, using list prices only, the cost-effectiveness comparison of lenvatinib versus BSC yields an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained of £65,872, and the comparison of sorafenib versus BSC yields an ICER of £85,644 per QALY gained. The deterministic sensitivity analyses show that none of the variations lowered the base-case ICERs to < £50,000 per QALY gained. Limitations We consider that it is not possible to compare the clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib and sorafenib. Conclusions Compared with placebo/BSC, treatment with lenvatinib or sorafenib results in an improvement in PFS, objective tumour response rate and possibly OS, but dose modifications were required to treat AEs. Both treatments exhibit estimated ICERs of > £50,000 per QALY gained. Further research should include examination of the effects of lenvatinib, sorafenib and BSC (including HRQoL) for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, and the positioning of treatments in the treatment pathway. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017055516. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

scholarly journals 992. Rethinking the 28-day HIV nPEP Dispensing Practice: A Pediatric ID Clinic Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S524-S525
Author(s):  
David Zhang ◽  
Julia Rosebush ◽  
Palak Bhagat ◽  
Allison Nelson ◽  
Veena Ramaiah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Wholesale Price ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Post Exposure Prophylaxis ◽  
Exposure Prophylaxis ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The University ◽  
Lost To Follow Up

Abstract Background In July 2017, The University of Chicago Comer Children’s Hospital Emergency Department (ED) transitioned from a 5-day to a 28-day HIV nPEP (non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis) dispensation model in an effort to increase adherence. Anecdotal reports of patients lost to follow-up after ED discharge called into question the utility and cost-effectiveness of this practice. We analyzed HIV nPEP follow-up rates in our clinic, explored reasons for nonadherence, and performed basic cost-savings analyses to inform potential changes to our dispensation model. Methods A retrospective review of both electronic health and pharmacy records was conducted for patients prescribed 28-days of HIV nPEP in the ED and scheduled for outpatient follow-up in Pediatric ID clinic from July 2017-June 2019. Clinic provider documentation of nPEP adherence and reasons for nonadherence were examined. Patients were given an initial dose of nPEP regimen in the ED and provided all subsequent doses to complete at home. Using average wholesale price (AWP), we calculated the total cost of each regimen and potential savings if a shorter duration of HIV nPEP supply was dispensed. Results 50 patients received a 28-day supply of HIV nPEP. Please refer to Table 1 regarding baseline patient characteristics. Of these, only 19 (38%) patients had documented outpatient follow-up after nPEP initiation. Median time to follow-up was 6 days (IQR: 3.0-9.0 days). Of the 19 patients with follow-up, 3 admitted to medication non-adherence. Although side effects were elicited in a total of 9 patients (18%), only 1 cited medication intolerance as the reason for discontinuing their nPEP. Given the relatively short time to follow-up, a potential savings of $1720-2211/patient could be achieved if a 10-14 day supply was dispensed. Conclusion Outpatient follow-up after 28-day HIV nPEP dispensation in our ED was &lt; 40%, calling into question the cost-effectiveness of this dispensation model. While our current practice alleviates nPEP interruption due to potential insurance issues and pick-up delays, follow-up and adherence are not assured. The significant cost-savings with a shorter supply at the outset may encourage more robust follow-up and adherence. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals A systematic review and economic evaluation of adalimumab and dexamethasone for treating non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis in adults

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (68) ◽  
pp. 1-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hazel Squires ◽  
Edith Poku ◽  
Inigo Bermejo ◽  
Katy Cooper ◽  
John Stevens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Posterior Uveitis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Dexamethasone Implant ◽  
Intermediate Uveitis ◽  
Sham Procedure ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundNon-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis and panuveitis are a heterogeneous group of inflammatory eye disorders. Management includes local and systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and biological drugs.ObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous adalimumab (Humira®; AbbVie Ltd, Maidenhead, UK) and a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®; Allergan Ltd, Marlow, UK) in adults with non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis.Data sourcesElectronic databases and clinical trials registries including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched to June 2016, with an update search carried out in October 2016.Review methodsReview methods followed published guidelines. A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone and adalimumab, each compared with current practice, from a NHS and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a lifetime horizon, parameterised with published evidence. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. Substantial sensitivity analyses were undertaken.ResultsOf the 134 full-text articles screened, three studies (four articles) were included in the clinical effectiveness review. Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) [VISUAL I (active uveitis) and VISUAL II (inactive uveitis)] compared adalimumab with placebo, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Time to treatment failure (reduced visual acuity, intraocular inflammation, new vascular lesions) was longer in the adalimumab group than in the placebo group, with a hazard ratio of 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.70;p < 0.001] in the VISUAL I trial and 0.57 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84;p = 0.004) in the VISUAL II trial. The adalimumab group showed a significantly greater improvement than the placebo group in the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) composite score in the VISUAL I trial (mean difference 4.20;p = 0.010) but not the VISUAL II trial (mean difference 2.12;p = 0.16). Some systemic adverse effects occurred more frequently with adalimumab than with placebo. One RCT [HURON (active uveitis)] compared a single 0.7-mg dexamethasone implant against a sham procedure, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Dexamethasone provided significant benefits over the sham procedure at 8 and 26 weeks in the percentage of patients with a vitreous haze score of zero (p < 0.014), the mean best corrected visual acuity improvement (p ≤ 0.002) and the percentage of patients with a ≥ 5-point improvement in VFQ-25 score (p < 0.05). Raised intraocular pressure and cataracts occurred more frequently with dexamethasone than with the sham procedure. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for one dexamethasone implant in one eye for a combination of patients with unilateral and bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the HURON trial, was estimated to be £19,509 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ICER of adalimumab for patients with mainly bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the VISUAL trials, was estimated to be £94,523 and £317,547 per QALY gained in active and inactive uveitis respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the rate of blindness has the biggest impact on the model results. The interventions may be more cost-effective in populations in which there is a greater risk of blindness.LimitationsThe clinical trials did not fully reflect clinical practice. Thirteen additional studies of clinically relevant comparator treatments were identified; however, network meta-analysis was not feasible. The model results are highly uncertain because of the limited evidence base.ConclusionsTwo RCTs of systemic adalimumab and one RCT of a unilateral, single dexamethasone implant showed significant benefits over placebo or a sham procedure. The ICERs for adalimumab were estimated to be above generally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone was estimated to fall below standard thresholds. However, there is substantial uncertainty around the model assumptions. In future work, primary research should compare dexamethasone and adalimumab with current treatments over the long term and in important subgroups and consider how short-term improvements relate to long-term effects on vision.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041799.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

scholarly journals Protocol for the economic evaluation of metacognitive therapy for cardiac rehabilitation participants with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e035552
Author(s):  
Gemma E Shields ◽  
Adrian Wells ◽  
Patrick Doherty ◽  
David Reeves ◽  
Lora Capobianco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Economic Model ◽  
Metacognitive Therapy ◽  
Trial Analysis ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Cost

IntroductionCardiac rehabilitation (CR) is offered to reduce the risk of further cardiac events and to improve patients’ health and quality of life following a cardiac event. Psychological care is a common component of CR as symptoms of depression and/or anxiety are more prevalent in this population, however evidence for the cost-effectiveness of current interventions is limited. Metacognitive therapy (MCT), is a recent treatment development that is effective in treating anxiety and depression in mental health settings and is being evaluated in CR patients. This protocol describes the planned approach to the economic evaluation of MCT for CR patients.Methods and analysisThe economic evaluation work will consist of a within-trial analysis and an economic model. The PATHWAY Group MCT study has been prospectively designed to collect comprehensive self-reported resource use and health outcome data, including the EQ-5D, within a randomised controlled trial study design (UK Clinical Trials Gateway). A within-trial economic evaluation and economic model will compare the cost-effectiveness of MCT plus usual care (UC) to UC, from a health and social care perspective in the UK. The within-trial analysis will use intention-to-treat and estimate total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for the trial follow-up. Single imputation will be used to impute missing baseline variables. Multiple imputation will be used to impute values missing at follow-up. Items of resource use will be multiplied by published national healthcare costs. Regression analysis will be used to estimate net costs and net QALYs and these estimates will be bootstrapped to generate 10 000 net pairs of costs and QALYs to inform the probability of cost-effectiveness. A decision analytical economic model will be developed to synthesise trial data with the published literature over a longer time frame. Sensitivity analysis will explore uncertainty. Guidance of the methods for economic models will be followed and dissemination will adhere to reporting guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThe economic evaluation includes a within-trial analysis. The trial which included the collection of this data was reviewed and approved by Ethics. Ethics approval was obtained by the Preston Research Ethics Committee (project ID 156862). The modelling analysis is not applicable for Ethics as it will use data from the trial (secondary analysis) and the published literature. Results of the main trial and economic evaluation will be published in the peer-reviewed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) journals library (Programme Grants for Applied Research), submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at appropriate conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN74643496; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document