Cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioural and personalized exercise interventions for reducing fatigue in inflammatory rheumatic diseases.
cognitive behavioural
cost-effectiveness
fatigue
inflammatory rheumatic diseases
personalized exercise
remote delivery
Journal
Rheumatology (Oxford, England)
ISSN: 1462-0332
Titre abrégé: Rheumatology (Oxford)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100883501
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 12 2023
01 12 2023
Historique:
received:
07
09
2022
accepted:
27
02
2023
medline:
4
12
2023
pubmed:
6
4
2023
entrez:
5
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a cognitive behavioural approach (CBA) or a personalized exercise programme (PEP), alongside usual care (UC), in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases who report chronic, moderate to severe fatigue. A within-trial cost-utility analysis was conducted using individual patient data collected within a multicentre, three-arm randomized controlled trial over a 56-week period. The primary economic analysis was conducted from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Uncertainty was explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and sensitivity analysis. Complete-case analysis showed that, compared with UC, both PEP and CBA were more expensive [adjusted mean cost difference: PEP £569 (95% CI: £464, £665); CBA £845 (95% CI: £717, £993)] and, in the case of PEP, significantly more effective [adjusted mean quality-adjusted life year (QALY) difference: PEP 0.043 (95% CI: 0.019, 0.068); CBA 0.001 (95% CI: -0.022, 0.022)]. These led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £13 159 for PEP vs UC, and £793 777 for CBA vs UC. Non-parametric bootstrapping showed that, at a threshold value of £20 000 per QALY gained, PEP had a probability of 88% of being cost-effective. In multiple imputation analysis, PEP was associated with significant incremental costs of £428 (95% CI: £324, £511) and a non-significant QALY gain of 0.016 (95% CI: -0.003, 0.035), leading to an ICER of £26 822 vs UC. The estimates from sensitivity analyses were consistent with these results. The addition of a PEP alongside UC is likely to provide a cost-effective use of health care resources.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37018151
pii: 7108764
doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead157
pmc: PMC10691924
doi:
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3819-3827Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Versus Arthritis
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Arthritis Research UK
ID : 21175
Pays : United Kingdom
Investigateurs
Amy Nicol
(A)
Karen Norris
(K)
Sandra Mann
(S)
Lorna Van Lierop
(L)
Eli Gomez
(E)
Fiona McCurdy
(F)
Valerie Findlay
(V)
Neil Hastie
(N)
Eunice Morgan
(E)
Roselyn Emmanuel
(R)
Daniel Whibley
(D)
Aimee Urquart
(A)
Laura MacPerson
(L)
Janice Rowland
(J)
Gwen Kiddie
(G)
Debbie Pankhurst
(D)
Paul Johnstone
(P)
Hilary Nicholson
(H)
Angela Dunsmore
(A)
Alison Knight
(A)
John Ellis
(J)
Callum Maclean
(C)
Linda Crighton
(L)
Cameron Shearer
(C)
Judy Coyle
(J)
Susan Begg
(S)
Lyndsey Ackerman
(L)
Jill Carnevale
(J)
Samantha Arbuthnot
(S)
Helen Watters
(H)
Dervil Dockrell
(D)
Debbie Hamilton
(D)
Dario Salutous
(D)
Susanne Cathcart
(S)
Dominic Rimmer
(D)
Emma Hughes
(E)
Juliet Harvey
(J)
Mairi Gillies
(M)
Susan Webster
(S)
Leeanne Milne
(L)
Gary Semple
(G)
Katharine Duffy
(K)
Lynne Turner
(L)
John Alexander
(J)
June Innes
(J)
Charlotte Clark
(C)
Christine Meek
(C)
Elizabeth McKenna
(E)
Christine Routledge
(C)
Helain Hinchcliffe-Hume
(H)
Emmanuella Traianos
(E)
Beth Dibnah
(B)
David Storey
(D)
Gemma O'Callaghan
(G)
Jenny Yael Baron
(JY)
Sally Hunt
(S)
Natalie Wheat
(N)
Pam Smith
(P)
Elizabeth Ann Barcroft
(EA)
Amy Thompson
(A)
Johanne Tomlinson
(J)
Jill Barber
(J)
Gladys MacPerson
(G)
Peter White
(P)
Sarah Hewlett
(S)
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.
Références
Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Aug 15;51(4):578-85
pubmed: 15334430
BMJ Open. 2019 Jan 30;9(1):e026793
pubmed: 30705244
Health Econ. 2015 Mar;24(3):258-69
pubmed: 24254584
J Rheumatol. 2005 Apr;32(4):721-8
pubmed: 15801031
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2003 Sep;42(9):1050-4
pubmed: 12730519
J Rheumatol. 1998 May;25(5):892-5
pubmed: 9598886
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Apr 15;55(2):233-40
pubmed: 16583413
Lancet Rheumatol. 2022 Jun 27;4(8):e534-e545
pubmed: 36388001
Arthritis Rheum. 2005 Oct 15;53(5):697-702
pubmed: 16208668
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 23;(8):CD008322
pubmed: 23975674
Rheumatol Int. 2007 Jul;27(9):847-52
pubmed: 17252263
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2018 Jan;34(5):481-497
pubmed: 30296954
Rheumatol Int. 2012 Jul;32(7):2117-24
pubmed: 21516494
Physiother Res Int. 2022 Jan;27(1):e1933
pubmed: 34780107
BMJ Open. 2019 Oct 16;9(10):e031151
pubmed: 31619428
Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Apr;45(2):111-21
pubmed: 11324773
Stat Med. 2019 Jan 30;38(2):210-220
pubmed: 30207407
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Nov 1;58(Suppl 5):v22-v28
pubmed: 31682276
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009 Mar;48(3):207-9
pubmed: 18927188
BMJ. 2009 Mar 16;338:b702
pubmed: 19289413
Health Technol Assess. 2019 Oct;23(57):1-130
pubmed: 31601357
Ann Rheum Dis. 2011 Jun;70(6):1060-7
pubmed: 21540202
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 May 09;14:163
pubmed: 23659344
Med Care. 2004 Sep;42(9):851-9
pubmed: 15319610
Lupus. 2000;9(2):101-9
pubmed: 10787006
Scand J Rheumatol. 2005 Jul-Aug;34(4):277-83
pubmed: 16195160