scholarly journals Cost effectiveness of two therapeutic regimens of infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis: economic evaluation within a randomised controlled trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Fautrel ◽  
M Benhamou ◽  
M Breban ◽  
C Roy ◽  
C Lenoir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Partial Remission ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Indirect Costs ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objective:To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of two therapeutic regimens of infliximab for ankylosing spondylitis (AS).Methods:230 patients with active AS who were participating in a randomised controlled trial comparing two infliximab infusion modalities—every 6 weeks (Q6) and on demand (DEM)—were included in an economic evaluation within the trial. Data were collected by phone every 3 months for 1 year. Direct and indirect costs were calculated from a payer perspective. Health-related quality of life was assessed with a general health rating scale. ICERs were calculated for one 20% improvement (ASAS20), for one partial remission and for one quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.Results:The Q6 regimen was significantly more efficacious than the DEM regimen but also more costly (€22 388 vs €17 596; p<0.001), because it required significantly more infliximab infusions per patient (8.4 vs 6.2). The ICERs of the Q6 to DEM regimen were €15 841 for one ASAS20 response, €23 296 for one partial remission and €50 760 for one QALY gained.Conclusion:The administration of infliximab every 6 weeks is cost effective as compared with a DEM regimen; however, the ICER is close to the acceptability threshold of €50 000 for one QALY gained.Trial registration number:NCT 00439283.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of habit-based advice for weight control versus usual care in general practice in the Ten Top Tips (10TT) trial: economic evaluation based on a randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e017511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishma Patel ◽  
Rebecca J Beeken ◽  
Baptiste Leurent ◽  
Rumana Z Omar ◽  
Irwin Nazareth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTen Top Tips (10TT) is a primary care-led behavioural intervention which aims to help adults reduce and manage their weight by following 10 weight loss tips. The intervention promotes habit formation to encourage long-term behavioural changes. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of 10TT in general practice from the perspective of the UK National Health Service.DesignAn economic evaluation was conducted alongside an individually randomised controlled trial.Setting14 general practitioner practices in England.ParticipantsAll patients were aged ≥18 years, with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. A total of 537 patients were recruited; 270 received the usual care offered by their practices and 267 received the 10TT intervention.Outcomes measuresHealth service use and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured over 2 years. Analysis was conducted in terms of incremental net monetary benefits (NMBs), using non-parametric bootstrapping and multiple imputation.ResultsOver a 2-year time horizon, the mean costs and QALYs per patient in the 10TT group were £1889 (95% CI £1522 to £2566) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.44 to 1.58). The mean costs and QALYs for usual care were £1925 (95% CI £1599 to £2251) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.45 to 1.57), respectively. This generated a mean cost difference of −£36 (95% CI −£512 to £441) and a mean QALY difference of 0.001 (95% CI −0.080 to 0.082). The incremental NMB for 10TT versus usual care was £49 (95% CI −£1709 to £1800) at a maximum willingness to pay for a QALY of £20 000. 10TT had a 52% probability of being cost-effective at this threshold.ConclusionsCosts and QALYs for 10TT were not significantly different from usual care and therefore 10TT is as cost-effective as usual care. There was no evidence to recommend nor advice against offering 10TT to obese patients in general practices based on cost-effectiveness considerations.Trial registration numberISRCTN16347068; Post-results.

scholarly journals Protocol for an economic evaluation of the randomised controlled trial of culprit lesion only PCI versus immediate multivessel PCI in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: CULPRIT-SHOCK trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e014849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahidul Quayyum ◽  
Andrew Briggs ◽  
Jose Robles-Zurita ◽  
Keith Oldroyd ◽  
Uwe Zeymer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Culprit Lesion ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Trial Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionEmergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion for patients with acute myocardial infarctions is an accepted practice. A majority of patients present with multivessel disease with additional relevant stenoses apart from the culprit lesion. In haemodynamically stable patients, there is increasing evidence from randomised trials to support the practice of immediate complete revascularisation. However, in the presence of cardiogenic shock, the optimal management strategy for additional non-culprit lesions is unknown. A multicentre randomised controlled trial, CULPRIT-SHOCK, is examining whether culprit vessel only PCI with potentially subsequent staged revascularisation is more effective than immediate multivessel PCI. This paper describes the intended economic evaluation of the trial.Methods and analysisThe economic evaluation will be conducted using a pre-trial decision model and within-trial analysis. The modelling-based analysis will provide expected costs and health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over the lifetime for the cohort of patients included in the trial. The within-trial analysis will provide estimates of cost per life saved at 30 days and in 1 year, and estimates of health-related quality of life. Bootstrapping and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be used to address any uncertainty around these estimates. Different types of regression models within a generalised estimating equation framework will be used to examine how the total cost and quality-adjusted life years are explained by patients’ characteristics, revascularisation strategy, country and centre. The cost-effectiveness analysis will be from the perspective of each country’s national health services, where costs will be expressed in euros adjusted for purchasing power parity.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the study was granted by the local Ethics Committee at each recruiting centre. The economic evaluation analyses will be published in peer-reviewed journals of the concerned literature and communicated through the profiles of the authors atwww.twitter.comandwww.researchgate.net.Trial registration numberNCT01927549; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE): protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aisha Shafayat ◽  
Emese Csipke ◽  
Lucy Bradshaw ◽  
Georgina Charlesworth ◽  
Florence Day ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Mild Dementia ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Memory services often see people with early stage dementia who are largely independent and able to participate in community activities but who run the risk of reducing activities and social networks. PRIDE is a self-management intervention designed to promote living well and enhance independence for people with mild dementia. This study aims to examine the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care or with usual care alone. Methods/design PRIDE is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, feasibility, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Eligible participants aged 18 or over who have mild dementia (defined as a score of 0.5 or 1 on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale) who can participate in the intervention and provide informed consent will be randomised (1:1) to treatment with the PRIDE intervention delivered in addition to usual care, or usual care only. Participants will be followed-up at 3 and 6 month’s post-randomisation. There will be an option for a supporter to join each participant. Each supporter will be provided with questionnaires at baseline and follow-ups at 3 to 6 months. Embedded qualitative research with both participants and supporters will explore their perspectives on the intervention investigating a range of themes including acceptability and barriers and facilitators to delivery and participation. The feasibility of conducting a full RCT associated with participant recruitment and follow-up of both conditions, intervention delivery including the recruitment, training, retention of PRIDE trained facilitators, clinical outcomes, intervention and resource use costs and the acceptability of the intervention and study related procedures will be examined. Discussion This study will assess whether a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of whether the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care is feasible in comparison to usual care alone, and if so, will provide data to inform the design and conduct of a future trial. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN11288961, registered on 23 October 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12345678 Protocol V2.1 dated 19 June 2019.

scholarly journals Cost effectiveness of home ultraviolet B phototherapy for psoriasis: economic evaluation of a randomised controlled trial (PLUTO study)

BMJ ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 340 (apr20 2) ◽  
pp. c1490-c1490 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. B. G. Koek ◽  
V. Sigurdsson ◽  
H. van Weelden ◽  
P. H. A. Steegmans ◽  
C. A. F. M. Bruijnzeel-Koomen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Ultraviolet B ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guided internet- and mobile-based depression intervention for individuals with chronic back pain: protocol of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. e015226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiaxi Lin ◽  
Lasse Sander ◽  
Sarah Paganini ◽  
Sandra Schlicker ◽  
David Ebert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Chronic Back Pain ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Work Capacity ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Rehabilitation Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionDepression often co-occurs with chronic back pain (CBP). Internet and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) might be a promising approach for effectively treating depression in this patient group. In the present study, we will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guided depression IMI for individuals with CBP (eSano BackCare-D) integrated into orthopaedic healthcare.Methods and analysisIn this multicentre randomised controlled trial of parallel design, the groups eSano BackCare-D versus treatment as usual will be compared. 210 participants with CBP and diagnosed depression will be recruited subsequent to orthopaedic rehabilitation care. Assessments will be conducted prior to randomisation and 9 weeks (post-treatment) and 6 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is depression severity (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17). Secondary outcomes are depression remission and response, health-related quality of life, pain intensity, pain-related disability, self-efficacy and work capacity. Demographic and medical variables as well as internet affinity, intervention adherence, intervention satisfaction and negative effects will also be assessed. Data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis with additional per-protocol analyses. Moreover, a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be conducted from a societal perspective after 6 months.Ethics and disseminationAll procedures are approved by the ethics committee of the Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg and the data security committee of the German Pension Insurance (Deutsche Rentenversicherung). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented on international conferences.Trial registration numberDRKS00009272; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document