Cargando…

A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer

BACKGROUND: We conducted a wait-list control randomised trial of an outpatient rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer, delivered in a hospice day care unit. We report the results of an economic evaluation undertaken using the trial data. METHODS: Forty-one participants were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Round, Jeff, Leurent, Baptiste, Jones, Louise
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4245741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25407558
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0558-5
_version_ 1782346413371293696
author Round, Jeff
Leurent, Baptiste
Jones, Louise
author_facet Round, Jeff
Leurent, Baptiste
Jones, Louise
author_sort Round, Jeff
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We conducted a wait-list control randomised trial of an outpatient rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer, delivered in a hospice day care unit. We report the results of an economic evaluation undertaken using the trial data. METHODS: Forty-one participants were recruited into the study. A within-trial stochastic cost-utility analysis was undertaken using Monte-Carlo simulation. The outcome measure for the economic evaluation was quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were measured from the perspective of the NHS and personal social services. Uncertainty in the observed data was captured through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Scenario analysis was conducted to explore the effects of changing the way QALYs were estimated and adjusting for baseline difference in the population. We also explore assumptions about the length of treatment benefit being maintained. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the base-case analysis was £14,231 per QALY. When QALYs were assumed to change linearly over time, this increased to £20,514 per QALY at three months. Adjusting the estimate of QALYs to account for differences in the population at baseline increased the ICER to £94,748 per QALY at three months. Increasing the assumed length of treatment benefit led to reduced ICERs in all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intervention is likely to be cost-effective in some circumstances, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the decision to implement the service. Further research, informed by a formal value of information analysis, would reduce this uncertainty.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4245741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42457412014-11-28 A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer Round, Jeff Leurent, Baptiste Jones, Louise BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: We conducted a wait-list control randomised trial of an outpatient rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer, delivered in a hospice day care unit. We report the results of an economic evaluation undertaken using the trial data. METHODS: Forty-one participants were recruited into the study. A within-trial stochastic cost-utility analysis was undertaken using Monte-Carlo simulation. The outcome measure for the economic evaluation was quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were measured from the perspective of the NHS and personal social services. Uncertainty in the observed data was captured through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Scenario analysis was conducted to explore the effects of changing the way QALYs were estimated and adjusting for baseline difference in the population. We also explore assumptions about the length of treatment benefit being maintained. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the base-case analysis was £14,231 per QALY. When QALYs were assumed to change linearly over time, this increased to £20,514 per QALY at three months. Adjusting the estimate of QALYs to account for differences in the population at baseline increased the ICER to £94,748 per QALY at three months. Increasing the assumed length of treatment benefit led to reduced ICERs in all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intervention is likely to be cost-effective in some circumstances, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the decision to implement the service. Further research, informed by a formal value of information analysis, would reduce this uncertainty. BioMed Central 2014-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4245741/ /pubmed/25407558 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0558-5 Text en © Round et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Round, Jeff
Leurent, Baptiste
Jones, Louise
A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title_full A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title_fullStr A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title_full_unstemmed A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title_short A cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
title_sort cost-utility analysis of a rehabilitation service for people living with and beyond cancer
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4245741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25407558
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0558-5
work_keys_str_mv AT roundjeff acostutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer
AT leurentbaptiste acostutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer
AT joneslouise acostutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer
AT roundjeff costutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer
AT leurentbaptiste costutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer
AT joneslouise costutilityanalysisofarehabilitationserviceforpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancer