Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Modelled cost-effectiveness analysis of the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway for chronic pain after total knee replacement compared with usual care.
Cole, Sophie; Noble, Sian; Gooberman-Hill, Rachael; Pinedo-Villanueva, Rafael.
Afiliação
  • Cole S; Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, OX3 7LD, Oxford, UK.
  • Noble S; Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, BS8 1NU, Bristol, UK.
  • Gooberman-Hill R; Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Royal Fort House, BS8 1UH, Bristol, UK.
  • Pinedo-Villanueva R; National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Cost Eff Resour Alloc ; 22(1): 28, 2024 Apr 11.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38605347
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The aim of the study was to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway for chronic pain after total knee replacement compared with usual postoperative care.

METHODS:

Study

design:

A decision-analytic (cohort Markov) model was used for the simulation with time dependent annual transition probabilities and a time horizon of five years.

SETTING:

Patients treated by National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England and Wales. STUDY POPULATION Adults classified as having chronic pain three months after undergoing a total knee replacement. INTERVENTION The STAR care pathway following a total knee replacement. COMPARATOR Usual postoperative care following a total knee replacement. PERSPECTIVE The study was undertaken from the perspective of the NHS. OUTCOME

MEASURES:

Quality-adjusted life years and healthcare costs. Discounting A rate of 3.5% for both costs and health utility.

RESULTS:

Model results indicate that the STAR intervention would dominate current practice by providing a gain in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.086 and a reduction of £375 (per person) in costs over the first five years. The incremental net monetary benefit of the STAR intervention was estimated at £2,086 (at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests the STAR intervention is likely to be cost-effective with a probability of 0.62. The results remain robust to changes in model assumptions on comparator utility and the timing of the start of the intervention. If hospital admission costs are assumed not to be reduced by the STAR intervention, it would no longer be cost saving, but it would likely be cost-effective based on probabilistic sensitivity analysis (0.59).

CONCLUSION:

Evidence from the economic model suggests that the STAR care pathway is likely to be cost-effective and potentially dominant from an NHS perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION The STAR trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN92545361.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cost Eff Resour Alloc Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cost Eff Resour Alloc Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido