Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting

BACKGROUND: We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ‘Best Care’ integrated disease management (IDM) program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to usual care (UC) within a primary care setting from the perspective of a publicly fun...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scarffe, Andrew D., Licskai, Christopher J., Ferrone, Madonna, Brand, Kevin, Thavorn, Kednapa, Coyle, Doug
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35962399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00377-w
_version_ 1784767580848783360
author Scarffe, Andrew D.
Licskai, Christopher J.
Ferrone, Madonna
Brand, Kevin
Thavorn, Kednapa
Coyle, Doug
author_facet Scarffe, Andrew D.
Licskai, Christopher J.
Ferrone, Madonna
Brand, Kevin
Thavorn, Kednapa
Coyle, Doug
author_sort Scarffe, Andrew D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ‘Best Care’ integrated disease management (IDM) program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to usual care (UC) within a primary care setting from the perspective of a publicly funded health system (i.e., Ontario, Canada). METHODS: We conducted a model-based, cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with expected values of costs and outcomes derived from a Monte-Carlo Simulation with 5000 replications. The target population included patients started in GOLD II with a starting age of 68 years in the trial-based analysis. Key input parameters were based on a randomized control trial of 143 patients (i.e., UC (n = 73) versus IDM program (n = 70)). Results were shown as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: The IDM program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients is dominant in comparison with the UC group. After one year, the IDM program demonstrated cost savings and improved QALYs (i.e., UC was dominated by IDM) with a positive net-benefit of $5360 (95% CI: ($5175, $5546) based on a willingness to pay of $50,000 (CAN) per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the IDM intervention for patients with COPD in a primary care setting is cost-effective in comparison to the standard of care. By demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of IDM, we confirm that investment in the delivery of evidence based best practices in primary care delivers better patient outcomes at a lower cost than UC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00377-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9373353
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93733532022-08-13 Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting Scarffe, Andrew D. Licskai, Christopher J. Ferrone, Madonna Brand, Kevin Thavorn, Kednapa Coyle, Doug Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ‘Best Care’ integrated disease management (IDM) program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to usual care (UC) within a primary care setting from the perspective of a publicly funded health system (i.e., Ontario, Canada). METHODS: We conducted a model-based, cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with expected values of costs and outcomes derived from a Monte-Carlo Simulation with 5000 replications. The target population included patients started in GOLD II with a starting age of 68 years in the trial-based analysis. Key input parameters were based on a randomized control trial of 143 patients (i.e., UC (n = 73) versus IDM program (n = 70)). Results were shown as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: The IDM program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients is dominant in comparison with the UC group. After one year, the IDM program demonstrated cost savings and improved QALYs (i.e., UC was dominated by IDM) with a positive net-benefit of $5360 (95% CI: ($5175, $5546) based on a willingness to pay of $50,000 (CAN) per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the IDM intervention for patients with COPD in a primary care setting is cost-effective in comparison to the standard of care. By demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of IDM, we confirm that investment in the delivery of evidence based best practices in primary care delivers better patient outcomes at a lower cost than UC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00377-w. BioMed Central 2022-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9373353/ /pubmed/35962399 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00377-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Scarffe, Andrew D.
Licskai, Christopher J.
Ferrone, Madonna
Brand, Kevin
Thavorn, Kednapa
Coyle, Doug
Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title_full Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title_short Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
title_sort cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35962399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00377-w
work_keys_str_mv AT scarffeandrewd costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting
AT licskaichristopherj costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting
AT ferronemadonna costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting
AT brandkevin costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting
AT thavornkednapa costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting
AT coyledoug costeffectivenessofintegrateddiseasemanagementforhighriskexacerbationpronepatientswithchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseinaprimarycaresetting