Tanajewski Lukasz, Franklin Matthew, Gkountouras Georgios, Berdunov Vladislav, Edmans Judi, Conroy Simon, Bradshaw Lucy E, Gladman John R F, Elliott Rachel A
School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Division of Rehabilitation and Ageing, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2015 May 5;10(5):e0121340. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121340. eCollection 2015.
Poor outcomes and high resource-use are observed for frail older people discharged from acute medical units. A specialist geriatric medical intervention, to facilitate Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, was developed to reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes and associated high resource-use in this group in the post-discharge period.
To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of a specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people in the 90 days following discharge from an acute medical unit, compared with standard care.
Economic evaluation was conducted alongside a two-centre randomised controlled trial (AMIGOS). 433 patients (aged 70 or over) at risk of future health problems, discharged from acute medical units within 72 hours of attending hospital, were recruited in two general hospitals in Nottingham and Leicester, UK. Participants were randomised to the intervention, comprising geriatrician assessment in acute units and further specialist management, or to control where patients received no additional intervention over and above standard care. Primary outcome was incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained.
We undertook cost-effectiveness analysis for 417 patients (intervention: 205). The difference in mean adjusted QALYs gained between groups at 3 months was -0.001 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.009, 0.007). Total adjusted secondary and social care costs, including direct costs of the intervention, at 3 months were £4412 (€5624, $6878) and £4110 (€5239, $6408) for the intervention and standard care groups, the incremental cost was £302 (95% CI: 193, 410) [€385, $471]. The intervention was dominated by standard care with probability of 62%, and with 0% probability of cost-effectiveness (at £20,000/QALY threshold).
The specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people discharged from acute medical unit was not cost-effective. Further research on designing effective and cost-effective specialist service for frail older people discharged from acute medical units is needed.
ISRCTN registry ISRCTN21800480 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21800480.
从急性医疗科室出院的体弱老年人预后较差且资源利用较高。为促进综合老年评估,开发了一种专科老年医学干预措施,以降低该群体出院后不良结局的发生率及相关的高资源利用情况。
比较专科老年医学干预措施与标准护理对急性医疗科室出院的体弱老年人在出院后90天内的成本及成本效益。
在一项双中心随机对照试验(AMIGOS)的同时进行经济评估。在英国诺丁汉和莱斯特的两家综合医院招募了433名(年龄在70岁及以上)有未来健康问题风险、在入院72小时内从急性医疗科室出院的患者。参与者被随机分配到干预组,包括在急性科室由老年病专家进行评估及进一步的专科管理,或对照组,即患者在标准护理之外不接受额外干预。主要结局是每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本。
我们对417名患者进行了成本效益分析(干预组:205名)。3个月时两组间获得的平均调整后QALY差值为-0.001(95%置信区间[CI]:-0.009,0.007)。3个月时,干预组和标准护理组的调整后二级和社会护理总成本,包括干预的直接成本,分别为4412英镑(5624欧元,6878美元)和4110英镑(5239欧元,6408美元),增量成本为302英镑(95%CI:193,410)[385欧元,471美元]。干预措施在62%的概率下被标准护理主导,且在成本效益方面的概率为0%(在每QALY阈值为20,000英镑时)。
针对从急性医疗科室出院的体弱老年人的专科老年医学干预措施不具有成本效益。需要进一步研究为从急性医疗科室出院的体弱老年人设计有效且具有成本效益的专科服务。
ISRCTN注册库ISRCTN21800480 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21800480 。