Cargando…

Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cost-of-illness studies often describe a single aggregate cost of a disease state. This approach is less helpful for a condition with a spectrum of outcomes like stroke. The modified Rankin Scale is the most commonly used outcome measure for stroke. We sought to describe the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilson, Alastair, Bath, Philip MW, Berge, Eivind, Cadilhac, Dominique A, Cuche, Matthieu, Ford, Gary A, Macisaac, Rachael, Quinn, Terence J, Taylor, Matthew, Walters, Matthew, Wolff, Claudia, Lees, Kennedy R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29900405
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2396987316684705
_version_ 1783330089497264128
author Wilson, Alastair
Bath, Philip MW
Berge, Eivind
Cadilhac, Dominique A
Cuche, Matthieu
Ford, Gary A
Macisaac, Rachael
Quinn, Terence J
Taylor, Matthew
Walters, Matthew
Wolff, Claudia
Lees, Kennedy R
author_facet Wilson, Alastair
Bath, Philip MW
Berge, Eivind
Cadilhac, Dominique A
Cuche, Matthieu
Ford, Gary A
Macisaac, Rachael
Quinn, Terence J
Taylor, Matthew
Walters, Matthew
Wolff, Claudia
Lees, Kennedy R
author_sort Wilson, Alastair
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cost-of-illness studies often describe a single aggregate cost of a disease state. This approach is less helpful for a condition with a spectrum of outcomes like stroke. The modified Rankin Scale is the most commonly used outcome measure for stroke. We sought to describe the existing evidence on the costs of stroke according to individual modified Rankin Scale categories. This may be useful in future cost effectiveness modelling studies of interventions where cost data have not been collected, but disability outcome is known. METHODS: Systematic review of the published literature, searching electronic databases between 2004 and 2015 using validated search filters. Results were screened to identify studies presenting costs by individual modified Rankin Scale categories. RESULTS: Of 17,782 unique identified articles, 13 matched all inclusion criteria. In only four of these studies were costs reported by modified Rankin Scale categories. Most studies included direct medical costs only. Societal costs were assessed in two studies. Overall, studies had a high methodological and reporting quality. The heterogeneity in costing methods used in the identified studies prevented meaningful comparison of the reported cost data. Despite this limitation, the costs consistently increased with greater severity (increasing modified Rankin Scale score). CONCLUSIONS: Few cost studies of stroke include information based on stroke recovery measured by individual modified Rankin Scale categories and the existing data are limited. To reliably capture this information, future studies are needed that preferably apply standardised costing methods to promote greater potential for use in cost-effectiveness analyses whereby direct collection of patient-level resource use has not been possible.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5992734
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59927342018-06-11 Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies Wilson, Alastair Bath, Philip MW Berge, Eivind Cadilhac, Dominique A Cuche, Matthieu Ford, Gary A Macisaac, Rachael Quinn, Terence J Taylor, Matthew Walters, Matthew Wolff, Claudia Lees, Kennedy R Eur Stroke J Guidelines BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cost-of-illness studies often describe a single aggregate cost of a disease state. This approach is less helpful for a condition with a spectrum of outcomes like stroke. The modified Rankin Scale is the most commonly used outcome measure for stroke. We sought to describe the existing evidence on the costs of stroke according to individual modified Rankin Scale categories. This may be useful in future cost effectiveness modelling studies of interventions where cost data have not been collected, but disability outcome is known. METHODS: Systematic review of the published literature, searching electronic databases between 2004 and 2015 using validated search filters. Results were screened to identify studies presenting costs by individual modified Rankin Scale categories. RESULTS: Of 17,782 unique identified articles, 13 matched all inclusion criteria. In only four of these studies were costs reported by modified Rankin Scale categories. Most studies included direct medical costs only. Societal costs were assessed in two studies. Overall, studies had a high methodological and reporting quality. The heterogeneity in costing methods used in the identified studies prevented meaningful comparison of the reported cost data. Despite this limitation, the costs consistently increased with greater severity (increasing modified Rankin Scale score). CONCLUSIONS: Few cost studies of stroke include information based on stroke recovery measured by individual modified Rankin Scale categories and the existing data are limited. To reliably capture this information, future studies are needed that preferably apply standardised costing methods to promote greater potential for use in cost-effectiveness analyses whereby direct collection of patient-level resource use has not been possible. SAGE Publications 2017-03-01 2017-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5992734/ /pubmed/29900405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2396987316684705 Text en © European Stroke Organisation 2016 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Guidelines
Wilson, Alastair
Bath, Philip MW
Berge, Eivind
Cadilhac, Dominique A
Cuche, Matthieu
Ford, Gary A
Macisaac, Rachael
Quinn, Terence J
Taylor, Matthew
Walters, Matthew
Wolff, Claudia
Lees, Kennedy R
Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title_full Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title_fullStr Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title_full_unstemmed Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title_short Understanding the relationship between costs and the modified Rankin Scale: A systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
title_sort understanding the relationship between costs and the modified rankin scale: a systematic review, multidisciplinary consensus and recommendations for future studies
topic Guidelines
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29900405
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2396987316684705
work_keys_str_mv AT wilsonalastair understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT bathphilipmw understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT bergeeivind understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT cadilhacdominiquea understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT cuchematthieu understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT fordgarya understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT macisaacrachael understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT quinnterencej understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT taylormatthew understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT waltersmatthew understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT wolffclaudia understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT leeskennedyr understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies
AT understandingtherelationshipbetweencostsandthemodifiedrankinscaleasystematicreviewmultidisciplinaryconsensusandrecommendationsforfuturestudies