Economic evaluation of an Australian nurse home visiting programme: a randomised trial at 3 years.
community child health
health economics
primary care
public health
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 12 2021
06 12 2021
Historique:
entrez:
7
12
2021
pubmed:
8
12
2021
medline:
8
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate the additional programme cost and cost-effectiveness of 'right@home' Nurse Home Visiting (NHV) programme in relation to improving maternal and child outcomes at child age 3 years compared with usual care. A cost-utility analysis from a government-as-payer perspective alongside a randomised trial of NHV over 3-year period. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted at 5%. Analysis used an intention-to-treat approach with multiple imputation. The right@home was implemented from 2013 in Victoria and Tasmania states of Australia, as a primary care service for pregnant women, delivered until child age 2 years. 722 pregnant Australian women experiencing adversity received NHV (n=363) or usual care (clinic visits) (n=359). First, a cost-consequences analysis to compare the additional costs of NHV over usual care, accounting for any reduced costs of service use, and impacts on all maternal and child outcomes assessed at 3 years. Second, cost-utility analysis from a government-as-payer perspective compared additional costs to maternal QALYs to express cost-effectiveness in terms of additional cost per additional QALY gained. When compared with usual care at child age 3 years, the right@home intervention cost $A7685 extra per woman (95% CI $A7006 to $A8364) and generated 0.01 more QALYs (95% CI -0.01 to 0.02). The probability of right@home being cost-effective by child age 3 years is less than 20%, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $A50 000 per QALY. Benefits of NHV to parenting at 2 years and maternal health and well-being at 3 years translate into marginal maternal QALY gains. Like previous cost-effectiveness results for NHV programmes, right@home is not cost-effective at 3 years. Given the relatively high up-front costs of NHV, long-term follow-up is needed to assess the accrual of health and economic benefits over time. ISRCTN89962120.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34873002
pii: bmjopen-2021-052156
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052156
pmc: PMC8650480
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e052156Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: The 'right@home' sustained nurse home visiting trial is a research collaboration between the Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY); the Translational Research and Social Innovation (TReSI) Group at Western Sydney University; and the Centre for Community Child Health (CCCH), which is a department of The Royal Children's Hospital and a research group of Murdoch Children’s Research Institute. Ownership of the right@home implementation and support licence, which is purchased by Australian state governments for roll out, is shared between institutes.
Références
Infant Ment Health J. 2006 Jan;27(1):5-25
pubmed: 28640426
Health Econ. 2018 Nov;27(11):1684-1698
pubmed: 29968290
Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can. 2015 Oct-Nov;35(8-9):151-9
pubmed: 26605564
J Health Soc Behav. 1995 Mar;36(1):1-10
pubmed: 7738325
J Public Health (Oxf). 2009 Sep;31(3):423-33
pubmed: 19497944
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e013307
pubmed: 28320789
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 10;10(11):e0142495
pubmed: 26554839
Midwifery. 2018 Oct;65:72-81
pubmed: 29980362
Br Med Bull. 2015 Sep;115(1):19-44
pubmed: 26224694
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Dec;23(6):1367-1374
pubmed: 28799197
Qual Life Res. 2016 Dec;25(12):3209-3219
pubmed: 27344318
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018 May;1419(1):141-159
pubmed: 29791738
Pediatrics. 2019 Jan;143(1):
pubmed: 30591616
Med Care. 1993 Feb;31(2):155-74
pubmed: 8433578
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jul;36(7):745-758
pubmed: 29779120
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Feb;36(2):239-252
pubmed: 29273843
Prev Sci. 2016 Jan;17(1):40-51
pubmed: 26103919
BMJ. 2004 Nov 20;329(7476):1233-6
pubmed: 15550430
Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(11):1103-9
pubmed: 11735677
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 01;10(4):e0120182
pubmed: 25830242
Lancet. 2016 Jan 9;387(10014):146-55
pubmed: 26474809
Rand Health Q. 2018 Mar 30;7(4):6
pubmed: 30083418