Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention for primary care patients with raised cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. DESIGN: A prospective within-trial patient-level economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients recruited...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dixon, Padraig, Hollinghurst, Sandra, Edwards, Louisa, Thomas, Clare, Gaunt, Daisy, Foster, Alexis, Large, Shirley, Montgomery, Alan A, Salisbury, Chris
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5013404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27566642
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012352
_version_ 1782452157936566272
author Dixon, Padraig
Hollinghurst, Sandra
Edwards, Louisa
Thomas, Clare
Gaunt, Daisy
Foster, Alexis
Large, Shirley
Montgomery, Alan A
Salisbury, Chris
author_facet Dixon, Padraig
Hollinghurst, Sandra
Edwards, Louisa
Thomas, Clare
Gaunt, Daisy
Foster, Alexis
Large, Shirley
Montgomery, Alan A
Salisbury, Chris
author_sort Dixon, Padraig
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention for primary care patients with raised cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. DESIGN: A prospective within-trial patient-level economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients recruited through primary care, and intervention delivered via telehealth service. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a 10-year CVD risk ≥20%, as measured by the QRISK2 algorithm, with at least 1 modifiable risk factor. INTERVENTION: A series of up to 13 scripted, theory-led telehealth encounters with healthcare advisors, who supported participants to make behaviour change, use online resources, optimise medication and improve adherence. Participants in the control arm received usual care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness measured by net monetary benefit at the end of 12 months of follow-up, calculated from incremental cost and incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Productivity impacts, participant out-of-pocket expenditure and the clinical outcome were presented in a cost-consequences framework. RESULTS: 641 participants were randomised—325 to receive the telehealth intervention in addition to usual care and 316 to receive only usual care. 18% of participants had missing data on either costs, utilities or both. Multiple imputation was used for the base case results. The intervention was associated with incremental mean per-patient National Health Service (NHS) costs of £138 (95% CI 66 to 211) and an incremental QALY gain of 0.012 (95% CI −0.001 to 0.026). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £10 859. Net monetary benefit at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY was £116 (95% CI −58 to 291), and the probability that the intervention was cost-effective at this threshold value was 0.77. Similar results were obtained from a complete case analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that the Healthlines telehealth intervention was likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27508731; Results. Prospectively registered 05 July 2012.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5013404
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50134042016-09-12 Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial Dixon, Padraig Hollinghurst, Sandra Edwards, Louisa Thomas, Clare Gaunt, Daisy Foster, Alexis Large, Shirley Montgomery, Alan A Salisbury, Chris BMJ Open Health Economics OBJECTIVES: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention for primary care patients with raised cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. DESIGN: A prospective within-trial patient-level economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients recruited through primary care, and intervention delivered via telehealth service. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a 10-year CVD risk ≥20%, as measured by the QRISK2 algorithm, with at least 1 modifiable risk factor. INTERVENTION: A series of up to 13 scripted, theory-led telehealth encounters with healthcare advisors, who supported participants to make behaviour change, use online resources, optimise medication and improve adherence. Participants in the control arm received usual care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness measured by net monetary benefit at the end of 12 months of follow-up, calculated from incremental cost and incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Productivity impacts, participant out-of-pocket expenditure and the clinical outcome were presented in a cost-consequences framework. RESULTS: 641 participants were randomised—325 to receive the telehealth intervention in addition to usual care and 316 to receive only usual care. 18% of participants had missing data on either costs, utilities or both. Multiple imputation was used for the base case results. The intervention was associated with incremental mean per-patient National Health Service (NHS) costs of £138 (95% CI 66 to 211) and an incremental QALY gain of 0.012 (95% CI −0.001 to 0.026). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £10 859. Net monetary benefit at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY was £116 (95% CI −58 to 291), and the probability that the intervention was cost-effective at this threshold value was 0.77. Similar results were obtained from a complete case analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that the Healthlines telehealth intervention was likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27508731; Results. Prospectively registered 05 July 2012. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5013404/ /pubmed/27566642 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012352 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Economics
Dixon, Padraig
Hollinghurst, Sandra
Edwards, Louisa
Thomas, Clare
Gaunt, Daisy
Foster, Alexis
Large, Shirley
Montgomery, Alan A
Salisbury, Chris
Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title_full Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title_short Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial
title_sort cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from the healthlines randomised controlled trial
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5013404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27566642
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012352
work_keys_str_mv AT dixonpadraig costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hollinghurstsandra costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT edwardslouisa costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT thomasclare costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gauntdaisy costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT fosteralexis costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT largeshirley costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT montgomeryalana costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT salisburychris costeffectivenessoftelehealthforpatientswithraisedcardiovasculardiseaseriskevidencefromthehealthlinesrandomisedcontrolledtrial