Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023
Cost-utility of a multicomponent intervention for fibromyalgia versus usual care: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
СтатьяPragmatic Clinical TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Arfuch Victoria Mailen, Aguilar Martín Carina, Berenguera Anna, Caballol Angelats Rosa, Gonçalves Alessandra Queiroga, Carrasco-Querol Noèlia, González Serra Gemma, Sancho Sol Maria Cinta, Fusté Anguera Immaculada, Friberg Emilie, Pettersson Emma, Casajuana Marc
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To perform an economic evaluation on a multicomponent intervention programme for patients with fibromyalgia syndrome compared with usual clinical practice in primary care.
DESIGN: A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04049006) from a societal perspective, a human capital approach, and a 1-year time horizon.
PATIENTS: Patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia syndrome from the public health system in south Catalonia, Spain.
METHODS: Crude and adjusted incremental cost- utility ratios were estimated to compare the treatment strategies based on cost estimations (direct medical costs and productivity losses) and quality-adjusted life years. One-way and 2-way deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The final analysed sample comprised 297 individuals, 161 in the intervention group and 136 in the control group. A crude incremental cost-utility ratio of € 1,780.75 and an adjusted ratio of € 851.67 were obtained, indicating that the programme significantly improved patients' quality of life with a cost-increasing outcome that fell below the cost-effectiveness threshold. The sensitivity analysis confirmed these findings when varying large cost components, and showed dominance when increasing session attendance.
CONCLUSION: The proposed multicomponent intervention programme was cost-effective compared with usual care for fibromyalgia, which supports its addition to standard practice in the regional primary care service.
DESIGN: A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04049006) from a societal perspective, a human capital approach, and a 1-year time horizon.
PATIENTS: Patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia syndrome from the public health system in south Catalonia, Spain.
METHODS: Crude and adjusted incremental cost- utility ratios were estimated to compare the treatment strategies based on cost estimations (direct medical costs and productivity losses) and quality-adjusted life years. One-way and 2-way deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The final analysed sample comprised 297 individuals, 161 in the intervention group and 136 in the control group. A crude incremental cost-utility ratio of € 1,780.75 and an adjusted ratio of € 851.67 were obtained, indicating that the programme significantly improved patients' quality of life with a cost-increasing outcome that fell below the cost-effectiveness threshold. The sensitivity analysis confirmed these findings when varying large cost components, and showed dominance when increasing session attendance.
CONCLUSION: The proposed multicomponent intervention programme was cost-effective compared with usual care for fibromyalgia, which supports its addition to standard practice in the regional primary care service.