Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons

BACKGROUND: The article reports on the cost-effectiveness of the proactive, integrated primary care program Finding and Follow-up of Frail older persons (FFF) compared with usual primary care for community-dwelling frail older persons in the Netherlands. METHODS: This study had a matched quasi-exper...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vestjens, Lotte, Cramm, Jane M., Birnie, Erwin, Nieboer, Anna P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31333333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-019-0181-8
_version_ 1783433749390688256
author Vestjens, Lotte
Cramm, Jane M.
Birnie, Erwin
Nieboer, Anna P.
author_facet Vestjens, Lotte
Cramm, Jane M.
Birnie, Erwin
Nieboer, Anna P.
author_sort Vestjens, Lotte
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The article reports on the cost-effectiveness of the proactive, integrated primary care program Finding and Follow-up of Frail older persons (FFF) compared with usual primary care for community-dwelling frail older persons in the Netherlands. METHODS: This study had a matched quasi-experimental design (pretest and posttest). The economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare perspective with a time horizon of 12 months. The target population consisted of community-dwelling frail older persons aged ≥ 75 years in the FFF intervention group (11 general practitioner (GP) practices) and in the control group receiving usual care (4 GP practices). The effectiveness measures for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were subjective well-being (Social Production Function Instrument for the Level of well-being short; SPF-ILs) and QALYs (EuroQol; EQ-5D-3L), respectively. Costs were assessed using resource use questionnaires. Differences in mean effectiveness between groups were assessed using univariate, multilevel and propensity score matched analyses, with and without imputation of missing values. Differences in costs were assessed using Mann–Whitney U-tests and independent samples t-tests. Bootstrapping was performed, and predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were depicted on cost-effectiveness planes. RESULTS: The various analyses showed slightly different results with respect to differences in estimated costs and effects. Multilevel analyses showed a small but significant difference between the groups for well-being, in favor of the control group. No significant differences between groups in terms of QALYs were found. Imputed data showed that mean total costs were significantly higher in the intervention group at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Proactive, integrated care for community-dwelling frail older persons as provided in the FFF program is most likely not a cost-effective initiative, compared with usual primary care in the Netherlands, in terms of well-being and QALYs over a 12-month period. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-019-0181-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6617694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66176942019-07-22 Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons Vestjens, Lotte Cramm, Jane M. Birnie, Erwin Nieboer, Anna P. Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: The article reports on the cost-effectiveness of the proactive, integrated primary care program Finding and Follow-up of Frail older persons (FFF) compared with usual primary care for community-dwelling frail older persons in the Netherlands. METHODS: This study had a matched quasi-experimental design (pretest and posttest). The economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare perspective with a time horizon of 12 months. The target population consisted of community-dwelling frail older persons aged ≥ 75 years in the FFF intervention group (11 general practitioner (GP) practices) and in the control group receiving usual care (4 GP practices). The effectiveness measures for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were subjective well-being (Social Production Function Instrument for the Level of well-being short; SPF-ILs) and QALYs (EuroQol; EQ-5D-3L), respectively. Costs were assessed using resource use questionnaires. Differences in mean effectiveness between groups were assessed using univariate, multilevel and propensity score matched analyses, with and without imputation of missing values. Differences in costs were assessed using Mann–Whitney U-tests and independent samples t-tests. Bootstrapping was performed, and predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were depicted on cost-effectiveness planes. RESULTS: The various analyses showed slightly different results with respect to differences in estimated costs and effects. Multilevel analyses showed a small but significant difference between the groups for well-being, in favor of the control group. No significant differences between groups in terms of QALYs were found. Imputed data showed that mean total costs were significantly higher in the intervention group at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Proactive, integrated care for community-dwelling frail older persons as provided in the FFF program is most likely not a cost-effective initiative, compared with usual primary care in the Netherlands, in terms of well-being and QALYs over a 12-month period. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-019-0181-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6617694/ /pubmed/31333333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-019-0181-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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
Vestjens, Lotte
Cramm, Jane M.
Birnie, Erwin
Nieboer, Anna P.
Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title_full Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title_short Cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
title_sort cost-effectiveness of a proactive, integrated primary care approach for community-dwelling frail older persons
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31333333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-019-0181-8
work_keys_str_mv AT vestjenslotte costeffectivenessofaproactiveintegratedprimarycareapproachforcommunitydwellingfrailolderpersons
AT crammjanem costeffectivenessofaproactiveintegratedprimarycareapproachforcommunitydwellingfrailolderpersons
AT birnieerwin costeffectivenessofaproactiveintegratedprimarycareapproachforcommunitydwellingfrailolderpersons
AT nieboerannap costeffectivenessofaproactiveintegratedprimarycareapproachforcommunitydwellingfrailolderpersons