Dataset Information

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of enhancing physical therapy exercise programmes in order to improve outcomes for patients with knee OA remains unclear. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of two enhanced physical therapy interventions compared with usual physical therapy care (UC) for adults with knee OA. Methods:A trial-based cost-utility analysis of individually tailored exercise (ITE) or targeted exercise adherence (TEA) compared with UC was undertaken over a period of 18 months. Patient-level costs were obtained, and effectiveness was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), allowing the calculation of cost per QALY gained from a base-case UK health-care perspective. Results:The UC group was associated with lower National Health Service (NHS) costs [ITE-UC: £273.30, 95% CI: £-62.10 to £562.60; TEA-UC: £141.80, 95% CI: £-135.60 to £408.10)] and slightly higher QALY gains (ITE-UC: -0.015, 95% CI: -0.057 to 0.026; TEA-UC: -0.003, 95% CI: -0.045 to 0.038). In the base case, UC was the most likely cost-effective option (probability?<40% of ITE or TEA cost-effective at £20 000/QALY). Differences in total costs were attributable to intervention costs, number of visits to NHS consultants and knee surgery, which were higher in both ITE and TEA groups. Conclusion:This is the first economic evaluation comparing usual physical therapy care vs enhanced exercise interventions for knee OA that involves greater exercise individualization, supervision and progression or that focuses on exercise and physical activity adherence over the longer term. Our findings show that UC is likely to be the most cost-effective option. Trial registration:Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 93634563. Trial protocol:Full details of the trial protocol can be found in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/15/254 doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-254.

SUBMITTER: Kigozi J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6251481 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial.

Kigozi Jesse J Jowett Sue S Nicholls Elaine E Tooth Stephanie S Hay Elaine M EM Foster Nadine E NE

Rheumatology advances in practice 20180606 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of enhancing physical therapy exercise programmes in order to improve outcomes for patients with knee OA remains unclear. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of two enhanced physical therapy interventions compared with usual physical therapy care (UC) for adults with knee OA.<h4>Methods</h4>A trial-based cost-utility analysis of individually tailored exercise (ITE) or targeted exercise adherence (TEA) compared with UC was un ...[more]

PMID: 30506022

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Exercise is consistently recommended for older adults with knee pain related to osteoarthritis. However, the effects from exercise are typically small and short-term, likely linked to insufficient individualisation of the exercise programme and limited attention to supporting exercise adherence over time. The BEEP randomised trial aims to improve patients' short and long-term outcomes from exercise. It will test the overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two physiotherapy-led exercise interventions (Individually Tailored Exercise and Targeted Exercise Adherence) to improve the individual tailoring of, and adherence to exercise, compared with usual physiotherapy care. METHODS/DESIGN:Based on the learning from a pilot study (ISRCTN 23294263), the BEEP trial is a multi-centre, pragmatic, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial, with embedded longitudinal qualitative interviews. 500 adults in primary care, aged 45 years and over with knee pain will be randomised to 1 of 3 treatment groups delivered by fully trained physiotherapists in up to 6 NHS services. These are: Usual Physiotherapy Care (control group consisting of up to 4 treatment sessions of advice and exercise), Individually Tailored Exercise (an individualised, supervised and progressed lower-limb exercise programme) or Targeted Exercise Adherence (supporting patients to adhere to exercise and to engage in general physical activity over the longer-term). The primary outcomes are pain and function as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis index. A comprehensive range of secondary outcomes are also included. Outcomes are measured at 3, 6 (primary outcome time-point), 9, 18 and 36 months. Data on adverse events will also be collected. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews with a subsample of 30 participants (10 from each treatment group) will be undertaken at two time-points (end of treatment and 12 to 18 months later) and analysed thematically. DISCUSSION:This trial will contribute to the evidence base for management of older adults with knee pain attributable to osteoarthritis in primary care. The findings will have important implications for healthcare commissioners, general practitioners and physiotherapy service providers and it will inform future education of healthcare practitioners. It may also serve to delay or prevent some individuals from becoming surgical candidates. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN:ISRCTN93634563.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited information on the costs and benefits of alternative adjunct non-pharmacological treatments for knee osteoarthritis and little guidance on which should be prioritised for commissioning within the NHS. This study estimates the costs and benefits of acupuncture, braces, heat treatment, insoles, interferential therapy, laser/light therapy, manual therapy, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, pulsed electrical stimulation, pulsed electromagnetic fields, static magnets and transcutaneous electrical nerve Stimulation (TENS), based on all relevant data, to facilitate a more complete assessment of value.MethodsData from 88 randomised controlled trials including 7,507 patients were obtained from a systematic review. The studies reported a wide range of outcomes. These were converted into EQ-5D index values using prediction models, and synthesised using network meta-analysis. Analyses were conducted including firstly all trials and secondly only trials with low risk of selection bias. Resource use was estimated from trials, expert opinion and the literature. A decision analytic model synthesised all evidence to assess interventions over a typical treatment period (constant benefit over eight weeks or linear increase in effect over weeks zero to eight and dissipation over weeks eight to 16).ResultsWhen all trials are considered, TENS is cost-effective at thresholds of £20-30,000 per QALY with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,690 per QALY vs. usual care. When trials with a low risk of selection bias are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £13,502 per QALY vs. TENS. The results of the analysis were sensitive to varying the intensity, with which interventions were delivered, and the magnitude and duration of intervention effects on EQ-5D.ConclusionsUsing the £20,000 per QALY NICE threshold results in TENS being cost-effective if all trials are considered. If only higher quality trials are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective at this threshold, and thresholds down to £14,000 per QALY.

Project description:IntroductionEvidence has demonstrated greater benefit of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) within earlier stages of knee osteoarthritis (OA) rather than waiting for patients to have progressed to later stages of disease progression. High molecular weight (HMW) HA has also been shown to be more effective than low molecular weight (LMW) HA products in mild to moderate knee OA, providing an important distinction to make within the class of IA-HA therapies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with knee OA with HMW HA compared to LMW and conservative treatment, while taking into account disease stage.MethodsDecision analytic models were created for early/moderate, as well as late stage knee OA. Models for late stage knee OA were created by assuming a range of response rates to IA-HA treatments from 10% to 50%. These models included conservative treatment using physical therapy/exercise, braces/orthosis, and medications such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and analgesics. The models compared the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained for these treatments to the use of either LMW or HMW HA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each treatment in relation to HMW HA.ResultsWhen evaluating treatment in early to moderate knee OA, HMW HA was dominant over LMW HA and physical therapy/exercise, as it was less expensive and provided greater benefit. HMW HA was cost-effective versus braces/orthosis and NSAID/analgesic medications based on a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000. In the model of 50% response rate to IA-HA for late stage OA, HMW HA remained cost-effective in comparison to physical therapy/exercise and braces/orthosis at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000; but not NSAID/analgesic medications. In the worst-case scenario of a 10% responder rate to IA-HA, HMW HA was no longer cost-effective in any circumstance.ConclusionIA-HA, particularly HMW formulations, demonstrate cost-effectiveness when compared to conservative treatment options and LMW HA in patients with early/mid stage knee OA. The cost-effectiveness of HMW HA in patients with later stage knee OA was not as apparent, particularly because of the uncertainty in the proportion of patients with late stage OA who have a meaningful improvement after receiving IA-HA. This cost-effectiveness finding supports the use of IA-HA in patients with early and moderate knee OA, as the benefits of IA-HA are apparent within the patient population with mild to moderate knee OA. The findings of this study suggest that there is a potential cost savings benefit as a result of utilizing HMW HA in earlier stages of knee OA as opposed to later stages.FundingFerring Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Project description:BackgroundTo analyze the cost-effective ratio of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the osteoarthritis (OA) treatment of at a regional medical center in China.MethodsOne hundred thirty-nine patients with osteoarthritis who underwent TKA at the Department of Osteoarthritis in Luhe hospital (Tongzhou, Beijing) from January 2011 to January 2012 were followed up. Their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was evaluated using Short-Form Health Survey (SF) -36 Chinese version, and compared with those of the normal population to assess quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained after surgery for its effectiveness of the treatment. The total expense was the cost of patient hospitalization. The cost per QALY was calculated. The cost-benefit ratio (CBR) was expressed as a ratio of each QALY's expenditure to per capita gross domestic product (GDP). Factors affecting the cost, including age, gender, length of stay, and ICU experience, were also considered.ResultsThe total hospitalization fee was Ұ8,053,736.68, Ұ57,940.55 in average, of which, 81.59% constituted out-of-pocket expenses. The SF-36 scores were as follows: Physical Function: 25.14, Role Physical: 7.12, Bodily Pain: 9.60, Role emotional: 5.58, Vitality: 19.9, Mental Health: 25.84, Social Function: 9.86 and General Health: 21.15. Compared with normal people of the same age and sex, a total of Ұ2487.74 QALYs and Ұ3237.37/QALY were gained, 10% less than the regional GDP per capita. The cost-effective ratio of TKA for osteoarthritis in China was 1: 10.78. The main cost of the patient was the cost of prosthesis (61.78%). The average cost afforded by patients' themselves was Ұ47,242.64 after the deduction of government subsidies. There were Ұ31,306.64 difference compared with the annual average income of the local people. The cost might be affected by length of stay and ICU experience. Longer stay caused more cost of treatment. Patients who remained in ICU after surgery had higher overall costs and blood transfusion costs.ConclusionThe factors that affect TKA cost are hospital and postsurgical ICU stay. It is cost-effective for regional medical care center to treat osteoarthritis using TKA economically. However, considering the average income of patients in the area, it is necessary to reduce the cost of the treatment.

Dataset Information

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial.

Publications

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets