Cargando…

Economic evaluations of fall prevention exercise programs: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To investigate cost-effectiveness and costs of fall prevention exercise programmes for older adults. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment database...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pinheiro, Marina B, Sherrington, Catherine, Howard, Kirsten, Caldwell, Patrick, Tiedemann, Anne, Wang, Belinda, S Oliveira, Juliana, Santos, Andreia, Bull, Fiona C, Willumsen, Juana F, Michaleff, Zoe A, Ferguson, Sarah, Mayo, Eleesheva, Fairhall, Nicola J, Bauman, Adrian E, Norris, Sarah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9685693/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36302631
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2022-105747
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To investigate cost-effectiveness and costs of fall prevention exercise programmes for older adults. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment database, Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Research Papers in Economics and EconLit (inception to May 2022). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Economic evaluations (trial-based or model-based) and costing studies investigating fall prevention exercise programmes versus no intervention or usual care for older adults living in the community or care facilities, and reporting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for fall-related outcomes or quality-adjusted life years (QALY, expressed as cost/QALY) and/or intervention costs. RESULTS: 31 studies were included. For community-dwelling older adults (21 economic evaluations, 6 costing studies), results ranged from more effective and less costly (dominant) interventions up to an ICER of US$279 802/QALY gained and US$11 986/fall prevented (US$ in 2020). Assuming an arbitrary willingness-to-pay threshold (US$100 000/QALY), most results (17/24) were considered cost-effective (moderate certainty). The greatest value for money (lower ICER/QALY gained and fall prevented) appeared to accrue for older adults and those with high fall risk, but unsupervised exercise appeared to offer poor value for money (higher ICER/QALY). For care facilities (two economic evaluations, two costing studies), ICERs ranged from dominant (low certainty) to US$35/fall prevented (moderate certainty). Overall, intervention costs varied and were poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS: Most economic evaluations investigated fall prevention exercise programmes for older adults living in the community. There is moderate certainty evidence that fall prevention exercise programmes are likely to be cost-effective. The evidence for older adults living in care facilities is more limited but promising. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020178023.