Centre for Health Economics & Medicines Evaluation, Institute of Medical and Social Care Research, Bangor University, Dean Street Building, Bangor LL57 1UT, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2013 Oct 29;13:1021. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1021.
A recent HTA review concluded that there was a need for RCTs of exercise referral schemes (ERS) for people with a medical diagnosis who might benefit from exercise. Overall, there is still uncertainty as to the cost-effectiveness of ERS. Evaluation of public health interventions places challenges on conventional health economics approaches. This economic evaluation of a national public health intervention addresses this issue of where ERS may be most cost effective through subgroup analysis, particularly important at a time of financial constraint.
This economic analysis included 798 individuals aged 16 and over (55% of the randomised controlled trial (RCT) sample) with coronary heart disease risk factors and/or mild to moderate anxiety, depression or stress. Individuals were referred by health professionals in a primary care setting to a 16 week national exercise referral scheme (NERS) delivered by qualified exercise professionals in local leisure centres in Wales, UK. Health-related quality of life, health care services use, costs per participant in NERS, and willingness to pay for NERS were measured at 6 and 12 months.
The base case analysis assumed a participation cost of £385 per person per year, with a mean difference in QALYs between the two groups of 0.027. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £12,111 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated an 89% probability of NERS being cost-effective at a payer threshold of £30,000 per QALY. When participant payments of £1 and £2 per session were considered, the cost per QALY fell from £12,111 (base case) to £10,926 and £9,741, respectively. Participants with a mental health risk factor alone or in combination with a risk of chronic heart disease generated a lower ICER (£10,276) compared to participants at risk of chronic heart disease only (£13,060).
Results of cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that NERS is cost saving in fully adherent participants. Though full adherence to NERS (62%) was higher for the economics sample than the main sample (44%), results still suggest that NERS can be cost-effective in Wales with respect to existing payer thresholds particularly for participants with mental health and CHD risk factors.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN47680448.
最近的一项 HTA 综述得出结论,需要对可能从运动中受益的有医学诊断的人群进行运动推荐计划(ERS)的 RCT。总体而言,ERS 的成本效益仍然存在不确定性。对公共卫生干预措施的评估对传统的健康经济学方法提出了挑战。这项针对国家公共卫生干预措施的经济评估通过亚组分析解决了 ERS 可能最具成本效益的问题,这在财政紧张时期尤为重要。
这项经济分析包括 798 名年龄在 16 岁及以上(随机对照试验(RCT)样本的 55%)的个体,他们有冠心病风险因素和/或轻度至中度焦虑、抑郁或压力。这些个体是由初级保健环境中的卫生专业人员推荐给威尔士的一项为期 16 周的全国运动推荐计划(NERS)的,该计划由合格的运动专业人员在当地的休闲中心提供。在 6 个月和 12 个月时,测量了健康相关的生活质量、卫生保健服务的使用、NERS 中每位参与者的费用以及对 NERS 的支付意愿。
基础案例分析假设每人每年的参与成本为 385 英镑,两组之间 QALYs 的平均差异为 0.027。增量成本效益比为每获得一个 QALY 需花费 12111 英镑。概率敏感性分析表明,在支付者阈值为 30000 英镑/QALY 时,NERS 有 89%的可能性具有成本效益。当考虑参与者支付 1 英镑和 2 英镑/课时,每 QALY 的成本从基础案例中的 12111 英镑降至 10926 英镑和 9741 英镑。仅存在心理健康风险因素或同时存在慢性心脏病风险因素的参与者产生的 ICER 较低(10276 英镑),而仅存在慢性心脏病风险因素的参与者产生的 ICER 较高(13060 英镑)。
成本效益分析的结果表明,对于完全依从的参与者,NERS 具有成本节约效果。尽管经济学样本的 NERS 完全依从率(62%)高于主要样本(44%),但结果仍表明,在现有支付者阈值方面,NERS 在威尔士具有成本效益,特别是对于存在心理健康和 CHD 风险因素的参与者。
当前对照试验 ISRCTN47680448。