From the Departments of *Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Department, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark †Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark ‡Region Hospital of Silkeborg, Orthopaedic Department, Denmark §Section of Social Medicine and Rehabilitation, Institute of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark ¶Public Health and Quality Improvement, Central Denmark Region, Denmark ‖CAST-Centre for Applied Health Services Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark; and **Institute for Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Nov 1;38(23):1979-85. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a7902c.
Economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up.
To examine the cost-effectiveness of initiating rehabilitation 6 weeks after surgery as opposed to 12 weeks after surgery.
In a previously reported randomized controlled trial, we assessed the impact of timing of rehabilitation after a lumbar spinal fusion and found that a fast-track strategy led to poorer functional ability. Before making recommendations, it seems relevant to address the societal perspective including return to work, quality of life, and costs.
A cost-effectiveness analysis and a cost-utility analysis were conducted. Eighty-two patients undergoing instrumented lumbar spinal fusion due to degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis (grade I or II) were randomized to an identical protocol of 4 sessions of group-based rehabilitation and were instructed in home exercises focusing on active stability training. Outcome parameters included functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and quality-adjusted life years. Health care and productivity costs were estimated from national registries and reported in euros. Costs and effects were transformed into net benefit. Bootstrapping was used to estimate 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
The fast-track strategy tended to be costlier by €6869 (95% CI, -4640 to 18,378) while at the same time leading to significantly poorer outcomes of functional disability by -9 points (95% CI, -18 to -3) and a tendency for a reduced gain in quality-adjusted life years by -0.04 (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.01). The overall probability for the fast-track strategy being cost-effective does not reach 10% at conventional thresholds for cost-effectiveness.
Initiating rehabilitation at 6 weeks as opposed to 12 weeks after surgery is on average more costly and less effective. The uncertainty of this result did not seem to be sensitive to methodological issues, and clinical managements who have already adapted fast-track rehabilitation strategies have reason to reconsider their choice. .
在一项为期 1 年随访的随机对照试验的基础上进行经济评估。
检验术后 6 周而不是 12 周开始康复治疗的成本效益。
在之前报道的一项随机对照试验中,我们评估了腰椎融合术后康复治疗时机对功能能力的影响,发现快速康复策略导致功能能力更差。在提出建议之前,似乎有必要从社会角度解决问题,包括重返工作岗位、生活质量和成本。
进行了成本效益分析和成本效用分析。82 例因退行性椎间盘疾病或脊椎滑脱症(I 或 II 级)接受器械性腰椎融合术的患者随机分为两组,每组均接受 4 次小组康复治疗,同时接受以主动稳定性训练为重点的家庭运动指导。结果参数包括功能障碍(Oswestry 残疾指数)和质量调整生命年。医疗保健和生产力成本根据国家登记数据进行估算,并以欧元报告。成本和效果转换为净收益。使用自举法估算 95%置信区间(95%CI)。
快速康复策略的成本平均高出 6869 欧元(95%CI,-4640 至 18378),同时功能障碍的结果明显更差,下降 9 分(95%CI,-18 至-3),质量调整生命年的增加也有下降趋势,降低 0.04(95%CI,-0.13 至 0.01)。快速康复策略在传统成本效益阈值下达到成本效益的总体概率不到 10%。
与术后 12 周相比,术后 6 周开始康复治疗平均成本更高,效果更差。该结果的不确定性似乎对方法问题不敏感,已经采用快速康复策略的临床管理者有理由重新考虑他们的选择。