Economic Evaluation of a Reablement Training Program for Homecare Staff Targeting Sedentary Behavior in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Compared to Usual Care: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

针对社区老年人久坐行为的家庭护理人员康复培训项目与常规护理相比的经济评价:一项整群随机对照试验

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: Training and supporting homecare staff in reablement aims to change staff behavior from "doing for" to "doing with" older adults and is assumed to benefit the health and quality of life of older adults and reduce healthcare utilization and costs. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the staff reablement training program "Stay Active at Home" (SAaH) from a societal perspective. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: An economic evaluation was embedded in a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial. Ten Dutch homecare nursing teams participated (n = 313 staff members), of which five teams were trained in reablement and the other five provided usual care. Cost and effect data were collected from 264 older adults at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Costs included "intervention," "healthcare," and "patient and family" costs (collectively, societal costs) and were assessed using questionnaires and client records or estimated by bottom-up micro-costing. Effects included sedentary behavior and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Multiple imputed bootstrapped data were used to generate cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between the intervention and control group in terms of sedentary time (adjusted mean difference: 4.8 minutes [95% CI -26.4, 36.0]), QALYs ( 0.01 [95% CI -0.03, 0.04]), and societal costs ( €2216 [95% CI -459, 4895]), except lower costs for domestic help in the intervention group ( €-173 [95% CI -299, -50]). The probability that SAaH was cost-effective compared to usual care ranged from 7.1% to 19.9%, depending on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) (€0‒€50,000)/minute of sedentary time averted and was 5.9% at a WTP of €20,000/QALY gained. CONCLUSION: SAaH did not improve outcomes or reduce costs and was not cost-effective from a societal perspective compared to usual care in Dutch older adults receiving homecare. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence to justify widespread implementation of the training program in its current form. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03293303.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。