Cost-Effectiveness of a Specialized Breathlessness Service Versus Usual Care for Patients With Advanced Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: The Munich Breathlessness Service (MBS) significantly improved control of breathlessness measured by the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) Mastery in a randomized controlled fast track trial with waitlist group design spanning 8 weeks in Germany. This study aimed to assess the within-trial cost-effectiveness of MBS from a societal perspective. METHODS: Data included generic (5-level version of EQ-5D) health-related quality of life and disease-specific CRQ Mastery. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated based on 5-level version of EQ-5D utilities valued with German time trade-off. Direct medical costs and productivity loss were calculated based on standardized unit costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and cost-effectiveness-acceptance curves were calculated using adjusted mean differences (AMD) in costs (gamma-distributed model) and both effect parameters (Gaussian-distributed model) and performing 1000 simultaneous bootstrap replications. Potential gender differences were investigated in stratified analyses. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and April 2019, 183 eligible patients were enrolled. MBS intervention demonstrated significantly better effects regarding generic (AMD of QALY gains of 0.004, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0003 to 0.008) and disease-specific health-related quality of life at nonsignificantly higher costs (AMD of €605 [95% CI -1109 to 2550]). At the end of the intervention, the ICER was €152 433/QALY (95% CI -453 545 to 1 625 903) and €1548/CRQ Mastery point (95% CI -3093 to 10 168). Intervention costs were on average €357 (SD = 132). Gender-specific analyses displayed dominance for MBS in males and higher effects coupled with significantly higher costs in females. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a high ICER for MBS. Considering dominance for MBS in males, implementing MBS on approval within the German health care system should be considered.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients With Bronchial Asthma: An Analysis of the EPRA Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: At 3 months after the intervention, this study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of a 3-week inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in patients with asthma compared with usual care alongside the single-center randomized controlled trial-Effectiveness of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients With Asthma. METHODS: Adopting a societal perspective, direct medical costs and productivity loss were assessed using the Questionnaire for Health-Related Resource Use-Lung, a modification of the FIM in an Elderly Population. The effect side was operationalized as minimal important differences (MIDs) of the Asthma Control Test (ACT) and the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and through quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Adjusted mean differences in costs (gamma-distributed model) and each effect parameter (Gaussian-distributed model) were simultaneously calculated within 1000 bootstrap replications to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and to subsequently delineate cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: PR caused mean costs per capita of €3544. Three months after PR, we observed higher mean costs (Δ€3673; 95% confidence interval (CI) €2854-€4783) and improved mean effects (ACT Δ1.59 MIDs, 95% CI 1.37-1.81; AQLQ Δ1.76 MIDs, 95% CI 1.46-2.08; QALYs gained Δ0.01, 95% CI 0.01-0.02) in the intervention group. The ICER was €2278 (95% CI €1653-€3181) per ACT-MID, €1983 (95% CI €1430-€2830) per AQLQ-MID, and €312 401 (95% CI €209 206-€504 562) per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Contrasting of PR expenditures with ICERs suggests that the intervention, which achieves clinically relevant changes in asthma-relevant parameters, has a high probability to be already cost-effective in the short term. However, in terms of QALYs, extended follow-up periods are likely required to comprehensively judge the added value of a one-time initial investment in PR.

Quality of life assessment in interstitial lung diseases:a comparison of the disease-specific K-BILD with the generic EQ-5D-5L.

BACKGROUND: Patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILD) have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQL). Little is known about the applicability of the disease-specific King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire (K-BILD) and the generic EQ-5D-5L in a German setting. METHODS: We assessed disease-specific (K-BILD) and generic HRQL (EQ-5D experience based value set (EBVS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS)) in 229 patients with different ILD subtypes in a longitudinal observational study (HILDA). Additionally, we assessed the correlation of the HRQL measures with lung function and comorbidities. In a linear regression model, we investigated predictors (including age, sex, ILD subtype, FVC percentage of predicted value (FVC%pred), DLCO percentage of predicted value, and comorbidities). RESULTS: Among the 229 patients mean age was 63.2 (Standard deviation (SD): 12.9), 67.3% male, 24.0% had idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and 22.3% sarcoidosis. Means scores were as follows for EQ-5D EBVS 0.66(SD 0.17), VAS 61.4 (SD 19.1) and K-BILD Total 53.6 (SD 13.8). K-BILD had good construct validity (high correlation with EQ-5D EBVS (0.71)) and good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.89). Moreover, all HRQL measures were highly accepted by patients including low missing items and there were no ceiling or floor effects. A higher FVC % pred was associated with higher HRQL in all measures meanwhile comorbidities had a negative influence on HRQL. CONCLUSIONS: K-BILD and EQ-5D had similar HRQL trends and were associated similarly to the same disease-related factors in Germany. Our data supports the use of K-BILD in clinical practice in Germany, since it captures disease specific effects of ILD. Additionally, the use of the EQ-5D-5L could provide comparison to different disease areas and give an overview about the position of ILD patients in comparison to general population.

Measuring quality of life in COPD patients: comparing disease-specific supplements to the EQ-5D-5L.

Objectives: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) show impairments in health-related quality of life (HRQL). We aimed to find a disease-specific questionnaire for routine application in large cohorts and to assess its additional explanatory power to generic HRQL tool (EQ-5D-5L). Methods: 1,350 participants of the disease management program COPD received the EQ-5D-5L combined with one of the three disease-specific tools: COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) or St. George's Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (SGRQ) (450 participants each). We compared metric properties and evaluated the Germany-specific experience-based values (EBVS) and utilities in comparison to the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). We calculated the additional explanatory power of the identified disease-specific tool on VAS through regression analysis. Results: 344 patients returned the questionnaire. CAT, CCQ, and SGRQ group did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. The questionnaire specific response rates were 33.7% for CAT, 30.5% for CCQ, and 34.6% SGRQ, thereof 94.0%, 94.3%, and 65.6% valid answers, respectively. EBVS was better suited to reflect VAS than utilities. CAT increased the explanatory power by 10%. Conclusion: CAT outperformed CCQ and SGRQ, and it increased the explanatory power of VAS. EBV combined with CAT seems superior to only generic or disease-specific approaches.