Hurley, M. V., Walsh, N. E., Mitchell, H. L., Pimm, T. J., Williamson, E., Jones, R. H., Reeves, B. C., Dieppe, P. A. and Patel, A. (2007) Economic evaluation of a rehabilitation program integrating exercise, self-management, and active coping strategies for chronic knee pain. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 57(7), pp. 1220-1229. ISSN (print) 0004-3591Full text not available from this archive.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic evaluation of the Enabling Self-Management and Coping with Arthritic Knee Pain through Exercise (ESCAPE-knee pain) program. METHODS: Alongside a clinical trial, we estimated the costs of usual primary care and participation in ESCAPE-knee pain delivered to individuals (Indiv-rehab) or groups of 8 participants (Grp-rehab). Information on resource use and informal care received was collected during face-to-face interviews. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility were assessed from between-group differences in costs, function (primary clinical outcome), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed to represent uncertainty around cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Rehabilitation (regardless of whether Indiv-rehab or Grp-rehab) cost 224 pounds (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 184 pounds, 262 pounds) more per person than usual primary care. The probability of rehabilitation being more cost-effective than usual primary care was 90% if decision makers were willing to pay 1,900 pounds for improvements in functioning. Indiv-rehab cost 314 pounds/person and Grp-rehab 125 pounds/person. Indiv-rehab cost 189 pounds (95% CI 168 pounds, 208 pounds) more per person than Grp-rehab. The probability of Indiv-rehab being more cost-effective than Grp-rehab increased as willingness to pay (WTP) increased, reaching 50% probability at WTP 5,500 pounds. The lack of differences in QALYs across the arms led to lower probabilities of cost-effectiveness based on this outcome. CONCLUSION: Provision of ESCAPE-knee pain had small cost implications, but it was more likely to be cost-effective in improving function than usual primary care. Group rehabilitation reduces costs without compromising clinical effectiveness, increasing probability of cost-effectiveness.
|Additional Information:||This work was supported by the Arthritis Research Campaign and AstraZeneca.|
|Research Area:||Allied health professions and studies
Health services research
|Faculty, School or Research Centre:||Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences (until 2013)|
|Depositing User:||Katrina Clifford|
|Date Deposited:||22 Nov 2010 09:43|
|Last Modified:||22 Nov 2010 09:43|
Actions (Repository Editors)
|Item Control Page|