Duevel Juliane A, Gruhn Sebastian, Grosser John, Elkenkamp Svenja, Greiner Wolfgang
AG 5-Health Economy and Healthcare Management, Faculty of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Jun 6;12(11):1157. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12111157.
Strokes remain a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. The STROKE OWL study evaluated a novel case management approach for patients with stroke (modified Rankin Scale 0-4) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) who received support across healthcare settings and secondary prevention training from case managers for one year. The primary aim of this quasi-experimental study was a reduction in stroke recurrence. Here, we report the results of a health economic analysis of the STROKE OWL study, conducted in accordance with CHEERS guidelines. The calculations were based on claims data of cooperating statutory health insurance companies. In addition to a regression analysis for cost comparison, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was determined, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was carried out. In total, 1167 patients per group were included in the analysis. The intervention group incurred 32.3% higher direct costs ( < 0.001) than the control group. With a difference of EUR 1384.78 (95% CI: [1.2384-1.4143], < 0.0001) and a 5.32% increase in hazards for the intervention group (HR = 1.0532, 95% CI: [0.7869-1.4096], = 0.7274) resulting in an ICER of EUR 260.30, we found that the case management intervention dominated in the total stroke population, even for an arbitrarily high willingness to pay. In the TIA subgroup, however, the intervention was cost-effective even for a low willingness to pay. Our results are limited by small samples for both TIA and severe stroke patients and by claims data heterogeneity for some cost components, which had to be excluded from the analysis. Future research should investigate the cost-effectiveness of case management interventions for both severe stroke and TIA populations using appropriate data.
中风仍然是全球范围内导致死亡和残疾的主要原因。“中风猫头鹰”(STROKE OWL)研究评估了一种针对中风患者(改良Rankin量表评分为0至4分)或短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)患者的新型病例管理方法,这些患者在不同医疗环境中接受了病例管理人员为期一年的支持和二级预防培训。这项准实验研究的主要目的是降低中风复发率。在此,我们报告根据CHEERS指南对 “中风猫头鹰” 研究进行的健康经济分析结果。计算基于合作法定健康保险公司的理赔数据。除了进行成本比较的回归分析外,还确定了增量成本效益比,并进行了概率敏感性分析。每组共有1167名患者纳入分析。干预组的直接成本比对照组高32.3%(<0.001)。干预组的差异为1384.78欧元(95% CI:[1.2384 - 1.4143],<0.0001),风险增加5.32%(HR = 1.0532,95% CI:[0.7869 - 1.4096],P = 0.7274),导致增量成本效益比为260.30欧元,我们发现病例管理干预在整个中风人群中占主导地位,即使对于任意高的支付意愿也是如此。然而,在TIA亚组中,即使支付意愿较低,干预措施也具有成本效益。我们的结果受到TIA和重症中风患者样本量小以及某些成本组成部分理赔数据异质性的限制,这些成本组成部分不得不从分析中排除。未来的研究应使用适当的数据调查病例管理干预措施对重症中风和TIA人群的成本效益。