Dataset Information

Cost Analysis of a Transition Care Bundle Compared with Usual Care for COPD Patients Being Discharged from Hospital: Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Appropriate management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients following acute exacerbations can reduce the risk of future exacerbations, improve health status, and lower care costs. While a transition care bundle (TCB) was associated with lower readmissions to hospitals than usual care (UC), it remains unclear whether the TCB was associated with cost savings.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate how this TCB was associated with future Emergency Department (ED)/outpatient visits, hospital readmissions, and costs in Alberta, Canada.

Methods

Patients who were aged 35 years or older, who were admitted to hospital for a COPD exacerbation, and had not been treated with a care bundle received either TCB or UC. Those who received the TCB were then randomized to either TCB alone or TCB enhanced with a care coordinator. Data collected were ED/outpatient visits, hospital admissions and associated resources used for index admissions, and 7-, 30- and 90-day post-index discharge. A decision model with a 90-day time horizon was developed to estimate the cost. A generalized linear regression was conducted to adjust for imbalance in patient characteristics and comorbidities, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted on the proportion of patients' combined ED/outpatient visits and inpatient admissions as well as the use of a care coordinator.

Results

Differences in length of stay (LOS) and costs between groups were statistically significant, although with some exceptions. Inpatient LOS and costs were 7.1 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.9-7.3) and Canadian dollars (CAN$) 13,131 (95% CI CAN$12,969-CAN$13,294) in UC, 6.1 days (95% CI 5.8-6.5) and CAN$7634 (95% CI CAN$7546-CAN$7722) in TCB with a coordinator, and 5.9 days (95% CI 5.6-6.2) and CAN$8080 (95% CI CAN$7975-CAN$8184) in TCB without a coordinator. Decision modelling indicated TCB was less costly than UC, with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of CAN$10,172 (40) versus CAN$15,588 (85), and TCB with a coordinator was slightly less costly than without a coordinator (CAN$10,109 [49] versus CAN$10,244 [57]).

Conclusion

This study suggests that the use of the TCB, with or without a care coordinator, appears to be an economically attractive intervention compared with UC.

SUBMITTER: Yan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10169973 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost Analysis of a Transition Care Bundle Compared with Usual Care for COPD Patients Being Discharged from Hospital: Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yan Charles C Round Jeff J Akpinar Ilke I Atwood Chantal E CE Deuchar Lesly L Bhutani Mohit M Leigh Richard R Stickland Michael K MK

PharmacoEconomics - open 20230311 3

<h4>Background</h4>Appropriate management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients following acute exacerbations can reduce the risk of future exacerbations, improve health status, and lower care costs. While a transition care bundle (TCB) was associated with lower readmissions to hospitals than usual care (UC), it remains unclear whether the TCB was associated with cost savings.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to evaluate how this TCB was associated with future Emerge ...[more]

PMID: 36905535

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTelemonitoring-guided interventional management reduces the need for hospitalization and mortality of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of usual care with and without telemonitoring-guided management in patients with CHF discharged from the hospital, from the perspective of US health care providers.MethodsA lifelong Markov model was designed to estimate outcomes of (1) usual care alone for all postdischarge patients with CHF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class I-IV), (2) usual care and telemonitoring for all postdischarge patients with CHF, (3) usual care for all postdischarge patients with CHF and telemonitoring for patients with NYHA class III to IV, and (4) usual care for all postdischarge patients with CHF plus telemonitoring for patients with NYHA class II to IV. Model inputs were derived from the literature and public data. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of model. The primary outcomes were total direct medical cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsIn the base case analysis, universal telemonitoring group gained the highest QALYs (6.2967 QALYs), followed by the telemonitoring for NYHA class II to IV group (6.2960 QALYs), the telemonitoring for NYHA class III to IV group (6.2450 QALYs), and the universal usual care group (6.1530 QALYs). ICERs of the telemonitoring for NYHA class III to IV group (US $35,393 per QALY) and the telemonitoring for NYHA class II to IV group (US $38,261 per QALY) were lower than the ICER of the universal telemonitoring group (US $100,458 per QALY). One-way sensitivity analysis identified five critical parameters: odds ratio of hospitalization for telemonitoring versus usual care, hazard ratio of all-cause mortality for telemonitoring versus usual care, CHF hospitalization cost and monthly outpatient costs for NYHA class I, and CHF hospitalization cost for NYHA class II. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, probabilities of the universal telemonitoring, telemonitoring for NYHA class II to IV, telemonitoring for NYHA class III to IV, and universal usual care groups to be accepted as cost-effective at US $50,000 per QALY were 2.76%, 76.31%, 18.6%, and 2.33%, respectively.ConclusionsUsual care for all discharged patients with CHF plus telemonitoring-guided management for NYHA class II to IV patients appears to be the preferred cost-effective strategy.

Project description:BackgroundA cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) performed from July 2018 to March 2019 demonstrated the clinical impact of a community pharmacist delivered minor ailment service (MAS) compared with usual pharmacist care (UC). MAS consisted of a technology-based face-to-face consultation delivered by trained community pharmacists. The consultation was guided by clinical pathways for assessment and management, and communication systems, collaboratively agreed with general practitioners. MAS pharmacists were trained and provided monthly practice support by a practice change facilitator. The objective of this study was to assess the cost utility of MAS, compared to UC.MethodsParticipants recruited were adult patients with symptoms suggestive of a minor ailment condition, from community pharmacies located in Western Sydney. Patients received MAS (intervention) or UC (control) and were followed-up by telephone 14-days following consultation with the pharmacist. A cost utility analysis was conducted alongside the cRCT. Transition probabilities and costs were directly derived from cRCT study data. Utility values were not available from the cRCT, hence we relied on utility values reported in the published literature which were used to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), using the area under the curve method. A decision tree model was used to capture the decision problem, considering a societal perspective and a 14-day time horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed robustness and uncertainty of results, respectively.ResultsPatients (n = 894) were recruited from 30 pharmacies and 82% (n = 732) responded to follow-up. On average, MAS was more costly but also more effective (in terms of symptom resolution and QALY gains) compared to UC. MAS patients (n = 524) gained an additional 0.003 QALYs at an incremental cost of $7.14 (Australian dollars), compared to UC (n = 370) which resulted in an ICER of $2277 (95% CI $681.49-3811.22) per QALY.ConclusionEconomic findings suggest that implementation of MAS within the Australian context is cost effective.Trial registration Registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) and allocated the ACTRN: ACTRN12618000286246. Registered on 23 February 2018.

Project description:There is a well-validated association between SLCO1B1 (rs4149056) and statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS). Preemptive SLCO1B1 pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing may diminish the incidence of SAMS by identifying individuals with increased genetic risk before statin initiation. Despite its potential clinical application, the cost implications of SLCO1B1 testing are largely unknown. We conducted a cost-consequence analysis of preemptive SLCO1B1 testing (PGx+) versus usual care (PGx-) among Veteran patients enrolled in the Integrating Pharmacogenetics in Clinical Care (I-PICC) Study. The assessment was conducted using a health system perspective and 12-month time horizon. Incremental costs of SLCO1B1 testing and downstream medical care were estimated using data from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' Managerial Cost Accounting System. A decision analytic model was also developed to model 1-month cost and SAMS-related outcomes in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 Veteran patients, where all patients were initiated on simvastatin. Over 12 months, 13.5% of PGx+ (26/193) and 11.2% of PGx- (24/215) participants in the I-PICC Study were prescribed Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline-concordant statins (Δ2.9%, 95% CI -4.0% to 10.0%). Differences in mean per-patient costs for lipid therapy prescriptions, including statins, for PGx+ compared to PGx- participants were not statistically significant (Δ USD 9.53, 95% CI -0.86 to 22.80 USD). Differences in per-patient costs attributable to the intervention, including PGx testing, lipid-lowering prescriptions, SAMS, laboratory and imaging expenses, and primary care and cardiology services, were also non-significant (Δ- USD 1004, 95% CI -2684 to 1009 USD). In the hypothetical cohort, SLCO1B1-informed statin therapy averted 109 myalgias and 3 myopathies at 1-month follow up. Fewer statin discontinuations (78 vs. 109) were also observed, but the SLCO1B1 testing strategy was 96 USD more costly per patient compared to no testing (124 vs. 28 USD). The implementation of SLCO1B1 testing resulted in small, non-significant increases in the proportion of patients receiving CPIC-concordant statin prescriptions within a real-world primary care context, diminished the incidence of SAMS, and reduced statin discontinuations in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients. Despite these effects, SLCO1B1 testing administered as a standalone test did not result in lower per-patient health care costs at 1 month or over 1 year of treatment. The inclusion of SLCO1B1, among other well-validated pharmacogenes, into preemptive panel-based testing strategies may provide a better balance of clinical benefit and cost.

Dataset Information

Cost Analysis of a Transition Care Bundle Compared with Usual Care for COPD Patients Being Discharged from Hospital: Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost Analysis of a Transition Care Bundle Compared with Usual Care for COPD Patients Being Discharged from Hospital: Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets