Dataset Information

Cost-utility analysis of a preventive home visit program for older adults in Germany.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Most older adults want to live independently in a familiar environment instead of moving to a nursing home. Preventive home visits based on multidimensional geriatric assessment can be one strategy to support this preference and might additionally reduce health care costs, due to the avoidance of costly nursing home admissions. The purpose of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of preventive home visits from a societal perspective in Germany.

Methods

This study is part of a multi-centre, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial aiming at the reduction of nursing home admissions. Participants were older than 80 years and living at home. Up to three home visits were conducted to identify self-care deficits and risk factors, to present recommendations and to implement solutions. The control group received usual care. A cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALY) based on the EQ-5D was performed. Resource utilization was assessed by means of the interview version of a patient questionnaire. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve controlled for prognostic variables was constructed and a sensitivity analysis to control for the influence of the mode of QALY calculation was performed.

Results

278 individuals (intervention group: 133; control group: 145) were included in the analysis. During 18 months follow-up mean adjusted total cost (mean: +4,401 EUR; bootstrapped standard error: 3,019.61 EUR) and number of QALY (mean: 0.0061 QALY; bootstrapped standard error: 0.0388 QALY) were higher in the intervention group, but differences were not significant. For preventive home visits the probability of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <50,000 EUR per QALY was only 15%. The results were robust with respect to the mode of QALY calculation.

Conclusions

The evaluated preventive home visits programme is unlikely to be cost-effective.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00644826.

SUBMITTER: Brettschneider C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4392621 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-utility analysis of a preventive home visit program for older adults in Germany.

Brettschneider Christian C Luck Tobias T Fleischer Steffen S Roling Gudrun G Beutner Katrin K Luppa Melanie M Behrens Johann J Riedel-Heller Steffi G SG König Hans-Helmut HH

BMC health services research 20150403

<h4>Background</h4>Most older adults want to live independently in a familiar environment instead of moving to a nursing home. Preventive home visits based on multidimensional geriatric assessment can be one strategy to support this preference and might additionally reduce health care costs, due to the avoidance of costly nursing home admissions. The purpose of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of preventive home visits from a societal perspective in Germany.<h4>Methods</h4>This s ...[more]

PMID: 25884452

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The ageing population is increasing worldwide, and this trend is bringing challenges both for the older person and for society. In order to meet the challenges a comprehensive approach is needed involving both health promotion and risk prevention. The preventive home visit is a public health intervention used around the world with the purpose of promoting health and preventing risk among older persons. However, most preventive home visits are focused on questions asking about risks. In order to strengthen the health promotion perspective during the preventive home visits, factors associated with good health need to be identified. The aim of this study was therefore to determine which factors were associated with good self-rated health among older persons who received preventive home visit. METHODS:This was a register study with a cross-sectional design, including older persons (?75?years old), living in their own homes, and that had received preventive home visit. Data were collected during a period of 9 months, in two municipalities in the south of Sweden. A questionnaire covered mental, physical and lifestyle factors were used at home visit. Binary logistic regression was used to analyse the data. RESULTS:In total, 619 older persons were included in the study; 55.4% were women, and the mean age was 80.6?years (standard deviation 2.2?years). The following items were significantly associated with good health (after adjustment for age and gender): being able to do things that make one feel valuable, having no physical problems affecting participation in social activities, not feeling sad, not having reduced energy, and not having impaired endurance. CONCLUSIONS:The main conclusion of this study is that questions focusing on risks could be seen from a health promotion perspective and could thus be turned into assets with a positive impact on older persons' health. Furthermore, the mental and physical factors identified in the results as associated with good health have implications for the person's ability to feel valuable and participate in social activities. The results suggest that issues regarding both health promotion as well as risk prevention must be brought up during the preventive home visit.

Project description:BackgroundHome visits for older adults aim to prevent cognitive and functional impairment, thus reducing institutionalization and mortality. Visitors may provide information, investigate untreated problems, encourage medication compliance, and provide referrals to services.Methods and findingsData sourcesTen databases including CENTRAL and Medline searched through December 2012.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials enrolling community-dwelling persons without dementia aged over 65 years. Interventions included visits at home by a health or social care professional that were not related to hospital discharge.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently extracted data. Outcomes were pooled using random effects.Main outcomes and measuresMortality, institutionalization, hospitalization, falls, injuries, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, quality of life, and psychiatric illness.ResultsSixty-four studies with 28642 participants were included. Home visits were not associated with absolute reductions in mortality at longest follow-up, but some programs may have small relative effects (relative risk?=?0.93 [0.87 to 0.99]; absolute risk?=?0.00 [-0.01 to 0.00]). There was moderate quality evidence of no overall effect on the number of people institutionalized (RR?=?1.02 [0.88 to 1.18]) or hospitalized (RR?=?0.96 [0.91 to 1.01]). There was high quality evidence for number of people who fell, which is consistent with no effect or a small effect (odds ratio?=?0.86 [0.73 to 1.01]), but there was no evidence that these interventions increased independent living. There was low and very low quality evidence of effects for quality of life (standardised mean difference?=?-0.06 [-0.11 to -0.01]) and physical functioning (SMD?=?-0.10 [-0.17 to -0.03]) respectively, but these may not be clinically important.ConclusionsHome visiting is not consistently associated with differences in mortality or independent living, and investigations of heterogeneity did not identify any programs that are associated with consistent benefits. Due to poor reporting of intervention components and delivery, we cannot exclude the possibility that some programs may be effective.

Project description:BackgroundeHealth technologies for self-management can improve quality of life, but little is known about whether the benefits gained outweigh their costs. The electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) mobile app and portal system supports patients with multiple chronic conditions to collaborate with primary health care providers to set and monitor health-related goals.ObjectiveThis study aims to estimate the cost of ePRO and the cost utility of the ePRO intervention compared with usual care provided to patients with multiple chronic conditions and complex needs living in the community, from the perspective of the publicly funded health care payer in Ontario, Canada.MethodsWe developed a decision tree model to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for the ePRO tool versus usual care over a time horizon of 15 months. Resource utilization and effectiveness of the ePRO tool were drawn from a randomized clinical trial with 6 family health teams involving 45 participants. Unit costs associated with health care utilization (adjusted to 2020 Canadian dollars) were drawn from literature and publicly available sources. A series of sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.ResultsThe total cost of the ePRO tool was CAD $79,467 (~US $ 63,581; CAD $1733 [~US $1386] per person). Compared with standard care, the ePRO intervention was associated with higher costs (CAD $1710 [~US $1368]) and fewer QALYs (-0.03). The findings were consistent with the clinical evidence, suggesting no statistical difference in health-related quality of life between ePRO and usual care groups. However, the tool would be considered a cost-effective option if it could improve by at least 0.03 QALYs. The probability that the ePRO is cost-effective was 17.3% at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CAD $50,000 (~US $40,000)/QALY.ConclusionsThe ePRO tool is not a cost-effective technology at the commonly used WTP value of CAD $50,000 (~US $40,000)/QALY, but long-term and the societal impacts of ePRO were not included in this analysis. Further research is needed to better understand its impact on long-term outcomes and in real-world settings. The present findings add to the growing evidence about eHealth interventions' capacity to respond to complex aging populations within finite-resourced health systems.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02917954; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02917954.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults are at greater risk of medication-related harm than younger adults. The Integrated Medication Management model is an interdisciplinary method aiming to optimize medication therapy and improve patient outcomes.ObjectiveWe aimed to investigate the cost effectiveness of a medication optimization intervention compared to standard care in acutely hospitalized older adults.MethodsA cost-utility analysis including 285 adults aged ≥ 70 years was carried out alongside the IMMENSE study. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived using the EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Level Health State Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L). Patient-level data for healthcare use and costs were obtained from administrative registers, taking a healthcare perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated for a 12-month follow-up and compared to a societal willingness-to-pay range of €/QALY 27,067-81,200 (NOK 275,000-825,000). Because of a capacity issue in a primary care resulting in extended hospital stays, a subgroup analysis was carried out for non-long and long stayers with hospitalizations < 14 days or ≥ 14 days.ResultsMean QALYs were 0.023 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.022-0.025] higher and mean healthcare costs were €4429 [95% CI - 1101 to 11,926] higher for the intervention group in a full population analysis. This produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €192,565/QALY. For the subgroup analysis, mean QALYs were 0.067 [95% CI 0.066-0.070, n = 222] and - 0.101 [95% CI - 0.035 to 0.048, n = 63] for the intervention group in the non-long stayers and long stayers, respectively. Corresponding mean costs were €- 824 [95% CI - 3869 to 2066] and €1992 [95% CI - 17,964 to 18,811], respectively. The intervention dominated standard care for the non-long stayers with a probability of cost effectiveness of 93.1-99.2% for the whole willingness-to-pay range and 67.8% at a zero willingness to pay. Hospitalizations were the main cost driver, and readmissions contributed the most to the cost difference between the groups.ConclusionsAccording to societal willingness-to-pay thresholds, the medication optimization intervention was not cost effective compared to standard care for the full population. The intervention dominated standard care for the non-long stayers, with a high probability of cost effectiveness.Clinical trial registrationThe IMMENSE trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 28 June, 2016 before enrolment started (NCT02816086).

Project description:BackgroundHearing aids (HA) is the primary medical intervention aimed to reduce hearing handicap. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HA for older adults who were volunteered to be screened for hearing loss in a community-based mobile hearing clinic (MHC).MethodsParticipants with (1) at least moderate hearing loss (≥40 dB HL) in at least one ear, (2) no prior usage of HA, (3) no ear related medical complications, and (4) had a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 18 were eligible for this study. Using a delayed-start study design, participants were randomized into the immediate-start (Fitted) group where HA was fitted immediately or the delayed-start (Not Fitted) group where HA fitting was delayed for three months. Cost utility analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of being fitted with HA combined with short-term, aural rehabilitation with the routine care group who were not fitted with HA. Incremental cost effectiveness ration (ICER) was computed. Health Utility Index (HUI-3) was used to measure utility gain, a component required to derive the quality adjusted life years (QALY). Total costs included direct healthcare costs, direct non-healthcare costs and indirect costs (productivity loss of participant and caregiver). Demographic data was collected during the index visit to MHC. Cost and utility data were collected three months after index visit and projected to five years.ResultsThere were 264 participants in the Fitted group and 163 participants in the Not Fitted group. No between-group differences in age, gender, ethnicity, housing type and degree of hearing loss were observed at baseline. At 3 months, HA fitting led to a mean utility increase of 0.12 and an ICER gain of S$42,790/QALY (95% CI: S$32, 793/QALY to S$62,221/QALY). At five years, the ICER was estimated to be at S$11,964/QALY (95% CI: S$8996/QALY to S$17,080/QALY) assuming 70% of the participants continued using the HA. As fewer individuals continued using their fitted HA, the ICER increased.ConclusionsHA fitting can be cost-effective and could improve the quality of life of hearing-impaired older individuals within a brief period of device fitting. Long term cost-effectiveness of HA fitting is dependent on its continued usage.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In Germany, a 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine (PPSV23) is recommended for elderly (60+) and patients 16+ with chronic diseases not associated with immune suppression. For all other patients at risk, sequential immunization with a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) first, followed by PPSV23 is recommended. Repeated vaccination with PPSV23 is recommended every 6 years after individual assessment by the physician. This was adopted into the vaccination directive with binding reimbursement and funding. However, additional voluntary services allow statutory health insurances to differentiate from each other. Aim of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of voluntary service scenarios compared to the strategy in place to support informed decision making. METHODS:A microsimulation framework with Markov-type process of a population susceptible to pneumococcal disease over a lifetime horizon was developed to compare effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different vaccination strategies. We simulated 1,000 iterations for seven scenarios. Assumptions were derived from published literature and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was run to show the robustness of the model. RESULTS:Our study indicates that all voluntary service strategies could prevent further clinical cases compared to the existing policy. Depending on the scenario, 48-142 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), 24,000-45,000 hospitalized all-cause nonbacteremic pneumonia (NBP), 15,000-45,000 outpatient NBP cases, and 4,000-8,000 deaths could be avoided on average. This refers to potential savings of €115 Mio. - €187 Mio. for medical and non-medical costs. Additional costs per patient for the payer are €2.48 to €7.13 and for the society €2.20 to €6.85. The ICER per LYG ranged from €3,662 to €23,061 (payer) and €3,258 to €29,617 (societal). All but one scenario was cost-effective in ≥60% of the generated 1,000 simulations. CONCLUSION:Compared to the vaccination strategy in place, the different hypothetical scenarios can be considered cost-effective and suitable as additional voluntary services.

Dataset Information

Cost-utility analysis of a preventive home visit program for older adults in Germany.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Cost-utility analysis of a preventive home visit program for older adults in Germany.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets