Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Among US Adults With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) after exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is effective in reducing COPD hospitalizations and mortality while improving health-related quality of life, yet use of PR remains low. Estimates of the cost-effectiveness of PR in this setting could inform policies to improve uptake.

Objective

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of participation in PR after hospitalization for COPD.

Design, setting, and participants

This economic evaluation estimated the cost-effectiveness of participation in PR compared with no PR after COPD hospitalization in the US using a societal perspective analysis. A Markov microsimulation model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness in the US health care system with a lifetime horizon, 1-year cycle length, and a discounted rate of 3% per year for both costs and outcomes. Data sources included published literature from October 1, 2001, to April 1, 2021, with the primary source being an analysis of Medicare beneficiaries living with COPD between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015. The analysis was designed and conducted from October 1, 2019, to December 15, 2021. A base case microsimulation, univariate analyses, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed.

Interventions

Pulmonary rehabilitation compared with no PR after COPD hospitalization.

Main outcomes and measures

Net cost in US dollars, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Results

Among the hypothetical cohort with a mean age of 76.9 (age range, 60-92) years and 58.6% women, the base case microsimulation from a societal perspective demonstrated that PR resulted in net cost savings per patient of $5721 (95% prediction interval, $3307-$8388) and improved quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) (gain of 0.53 [95% prediction interval, 0.43-0.63] years). The findings of net cost savings and improved QALE with PR did not change in univariate analyses of patient age, the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease stage, or number of PR sessions. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PR resulted in net cost savings and improved QALE in every one of 1000 samples and was the dominant strategy in 100% of simulations at any willingness-to-pay threshold. In a 1-way sensitivity analysis of total cost, assuming completion of 36 sessions, a single PR session would remain cost saving to $171 per session and had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $884 per session for $50 000/QALY and $1597 per session for $100 000/QALY.

Conclusions and relevance

In this economic evaluation, PR after COPD hospitalization appeared to result in net cost savings along with improvement in QALE. These findings suggest that stakeholders should identify policies to increase access and adherence to PR for patients with COPD.

SUBMITTER: Mosher CL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9218844 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme (SEPRP) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) relative to usual practice in primary care. The programme consisted of group-based sessions delivered jointly by practice nurses and physiotherapists over 8 weeks.DesignCost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial.Setting32 general practices in Ireland.Participants350 adults with COPD, 69% of whom were moderately affected.InterventionsIntervention arm (n=178) received a 2 h group-based SEPRP session per week over 8 weeks delivered jointly by a practice nurse and physiotherapist at the practice surgery or nearby venue. The control arm (n=172) received the usual practice in primary care.Main outcome measuresIncremental costs, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) scores, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained estimated using the generic EQ5D instrument, and expected cost-effectiveness at 22 weeks trial follow-up.ResultsThe intervention was associated with an increase of €944 (95% CIs 489 to 1400) in mean healthcare cost and €261 (95% CIs 226 to 296) in mean patient cost. The intervention was associated with a mean improvement of 1.11 (95% CIs 0.35 to 1.87) in CRQ Total score and 0.002 (95% CIs -0.006 to 0.011) in QALYs gained. These translated into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €850 per unit increase in CRQ Total score and €472 000 per additional QALY gained. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective at respective threshold values of €5000, €15 000, €25 000, €35 000 and €45 000 was 0.980, 0.992, 0.994, 0.994 and 0.994 in the CRQ Total score analysis compared to 0.000, 0.001, 0.001, 0.003 and 0.007 in the QALYs gained analysis.ConclusionsWhile analysis suggests that SEPRP was cost-effective if society is willing to pay at least €850 per one-point increase in disease-specific CRQ, no evidence exists when effectiveness was measured in QALYS gained.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN52 403 063.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is considered a key component in managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, uptake remains suboptimal. This systematic review aimed to determine the effectiveness of home-based PR (HBPR) programs for COPD patients.MethodsA systematic review of scholarly literature published within the last 10 years from the conception of this project was conducted using internationally recognized guidelines. Search strategies were applied to electronic databases and clinical trial registries through March 2020 and updated in November 2021 to identify studies comparing HBPR with 'usual care' or outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (OPR). To critically appraise randomized studies, the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (ROB) was used. The quality of non-randomized studies was evaluated using the ACROBAT-NRSI tool. The quality of evidence relating to key outcomes was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), exacerbation frequencies, COPD-related hospital admissions, and program adherence. Three independent reviewers assessed methodologic quality and reviewed the studies.ResultsTwelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 comparative observational studies were included. While considerable evidence relating to the effectiveness of HBPR programs for COPD patients exist, overall quality is low. There were no differences between HBPR and OPR in terms of safety, HRQoL, functional exercise capacity and health care resource utilization. Compared to usual care, functional exercise capacity seemed to significantly improve after HBPR. While patient compliance with HBPR is good, two factors appeared to increase the 'risk' of non-compliance: expectations of patients to 1) complete daily diaries/activity logs and 2) engage in solely unsupervised exercise sessions.ConclusionThe overall quality for most outcomes was low to very low; however, HBPR seems to offer comparable short-term benefits to OPR.

Project description:RationaleCurrent practice guidelines recommend pulmonary rehabilitation as an adjunct to standard pharmacologic therapy for individuals with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Whether pulmonary rehabilitation benefits all subjects with COPD independent of baseline disease burden is not known.ObjectivesTo test whether pulmonary rehabilitation benefits patients with COPD independent of baseline exercise capacity, dyspnea, and lung function.MethodsData from a prospectively maintained database of participants with COPD enrolled in pulmonary rehabilitation at the University of Alabama at Birmingham from 1996 to 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Subjects were divided into four quartiles based on their baseline level of dyspnea as assessed by the San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire at the initial visit. Similar quartiles were assessed for FEV1 percent predicted as well as the 6-minute-walk distance (6MWD). The primary outcome was the change in quality of life as measured by the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Secondary outcomes were change in dyspnea, 6MWD, and depression scores assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Differences between baseline and final scores were compared using paired t tests and across quartiles using analysis of variance.Measurements and main resultsA total of 229 subjects were included. Their mean age was 66.5 (SD, 9) years. Ninety-one (40%) were female, and 42 (18%) were African American. The mean FEV1 percent predicted was 46.3% (20.0%). On completion of pulmonary rehabilitation, clinically significant improvements were seen in most components of SF-36: physical function, 11.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-15.5; P < 0.001); health perception, 2.1 (95% CI, -0.7 to 4.8; P = 0.12); physical role, 16.7 (95% CI, 10.3-23.1; P < 0.001); emotional role, 14.7 (95% CI, 7.1-22.3; P < 0.001); social function, 16.4 (95% CI, 11.3-21.5; P < 0.001); mental health, 5.4 (95% CI, 2.6-8.3; P < 0.001); pain, 5 (95% CI, 1-9.1; P = 0.02); vitality, 12.4 (95% CI, 8.8-16.1; P < 0.001); and depression, 0.01 (95% CI, -0.11 to 0.07; P = 0.54). There was no difference in improvement in SF-36 across quartiles of San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire, 6MWD, and FEV1 percent predicted.ConclusionsPulmonary rehabilitation results in significant improvement in quality of life, dyspnea, and functional capacity independent of baseline disease burden.

Project description:BackgroundThe medico-economic impact of smoking cessation considering a smoking patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is poorly documented.ObjectiveHere, considering a COPD smoking patient, the specific burden of continuous smoking was estimated, as well as the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation.MethodsA multi-state Markov model adopting society's perspective was developed. Simulated cohorts of English COPD patients who are active smokers (all severity stages combined or patients with the same initial severity stage) were compared to identical cohorts of patients who quit smoking at cohort initialization. Life expectancy, quality adjusted life-years (QALY), disease-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER: £/QALY) were estimated, considering smoking cessation programs with various possible scenarios of success rates and costs. Sensitivity analyses included the variation of model key parameters.Principal findingsAt the horizon of a smoking COPD patient's remaining lifetime, smoking cessation at cohort intitialization, relapses being allowed as observed in practice, would result in gains (mean) of 1.27 life-years and 0.68 QALY, and induce savings of -1824 £/patient in the disease-related costs. The corresponding ICER was -2686 £/QALY. Smoking cessation resulted in 0.72, 0.69, 0.64 and 0.42 QALY respectively gained per mild, moderate, severe, and very severe COPD patient, but was nevertheless cost-effective for mild to severe COPD patients in most scenarios, even when hypothesizing expensive smoking cessation intervention programmes associated with low success rates. Considering a ten-year time horizon, the burden of continuous smoking in English COPD patients was estimated to cost a total of 1657 M£ while 452516 QALY would be simultaneously lost.ConclusionsThe study results are a useful support for the setting of smoking cessation programmes specifically targeted to COPD patients.