Programmatic Costs of the Telehealth Ostomy Self-Management Training: An Application of Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing.

OBJECTIVES: Programmatic cost assessment of novel clinical interventions can inform their widespread dissemination and implementation. This study aimed to determine the programmatic costs of a telehealth Ostomy Self-Management Training (OSMT) intervention for cancer survivors using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) methodology. METHODS: We demonstrated a step-by-step application of TDABC based on a process map with core OSMT intervention activities and associated procedures and determined resource use and costs, per unit procedure. We also assessed per-patient costs from a payer perspective and provided estimates of total hours and costs by personnel, activity, and procedure. RESULTS: The per-patient cost of the OSMT was $1758. Personnel time accounted for 91% of the total cost. Site supervisor and information technology technician time were the most expensive personnel resources. Telehealth technical and communication equipment accounted for 8% of the total cost. Intervention coordination and monitoring efforts represented most of the total time cost (62%), followed by the intervention delivery (35%). The procedures with the highest cost were communication via phone or virtual meetings (24%), email exchanges (18%), and telehealth session delivery (18%). CONCLUSIONS: Future efforts to replicate, disseminate, and implement the OSMT intervention should anticipate funding for nonclinical components of the intervention, including coordination and monitoring, and consider how these activities can be performed most efficiently. For institutions without established telemedicine programs, selection of videoconferencing platforms and adequate staffing for participant technical support should be considered. Our step-by-step application of TDABC serves as a case study demonstrating how interventionists can gather data on resource use and costs of intervention activities concurrently with their collection of trial data.

Self-management interventions for adults living with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): The development of a Core Outcome Set for COMPAR-EU project.

BACKGROUND: A large body of evidence suggests that self-management interventions (SMIs) may improve outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, accurate comparisons of the relative effectiveness of SMIs are challenging, partly due to heterogeneity of outcomes across trials and uncertainty about the importance of these outcomes for patients. We aimed to develop a core set of patient-relevant outcomes (COS) for SMIs trials to enhance comparability of interventions and ensure person-centred care. METHODS: We undertook an innovative approach consisting of four interlinked stages: i) Development of an initial catalogue of outcomes from previous EU-funded projects and/or published studies, ii) Scoping review of reviews on patients and caregivers' perspectives to identify outcomes of interest, iii) Two-round Delphi online survey with patients and patient representatives to rate the importance of outcomes, and iv) Face-to-face consensus workshop with patients, patient representatives, health professionals and researchers to develop the COS. RESULTS: From an initial list of 79 potential outcomes, 16 were included in the COS plus one supplementary outcome relevant to all participants. These were related to patient and caregiver knowledge/competence, self-efficacy, patient activation, self-monitoring, adherence, smoking cessation, COPD symptoms, physical activity, sleep quality, caregiver quality of life, activities of daily living, coping with the disease, participation and decision-making, emergency room visits/admissions and cost effectiveness. CONCLUSION: The development of the COPD COS for the evaluation of SMIs will increase consistency in the measurement and reporting of outcomes across trials. It will also contribute to more personalized health care and more informed health decisions in clinical practice as patients' preferences regarding COPD outcomes are more systematically included.

Cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation, exercise, and self-management for spinal pain using an individual participant data meta-analysis approach: a study protocol.

Background: Spinal pain is a common and disabling condition with considerable socioeconomic burden. Spine pain management in the United States has gathered increased scrutiny amidst concerns of overutilization of costly and potentially harmful interventions and diagnostic tests. Conservative interventions such as spinal manipulation, exercise and self-management may provide value for the care of spinal pain, but little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of these interventions in the U.S. Our primary objective for this project is to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation, exercise therapy, and self-management for spinal pain using an individual patient data meta-analysis approach. Methods/design: We will estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation, exercise therapy, and self-management using cost and clinical outcome data collected in eight randomized clinical trials performed in the U.S. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed from both societal and healthcare perspectives using QALYs, pain intensity, and disability as effectiveness measures. The eight randomized clinical trials used similar methods and included different combinations of spinal manipulation, exercise therapy, or self-management for spinal pain. They also collected similar clinical outcome, healthcare utilization, and work productivity data. A two-stage approach to individual patient data meta-analysis will be conducted. Discussion: This project capitalizes on a unique opportunity to combine clinical and economic data collected in a several clinical trials that used similar methods. The findings will provide important information on the value of spinal manipulation, exercise therapy, and self-management for spinal pain management in the U.S.

Self-management for bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: Bronchiectasis is a long term respiratory condition with an increasing rate of diagnosis. It is associated with persistent symptoms, repeated infective exacerbations, and reduced quality of life, imposing a burden on individuals and healthcare systems. The main aims of therapeutic management are to reduce exacerbations and improve quality of life. Self-management interventions are potentially important for empowering people with bronchiectasis to manage their condition more effectively and to seek care in a timely manner. Self-management interventions are beneficial in the management of other airways diseases such as asthma and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and have been identified as a research priority for bronchiectasis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and adverse effects of self-management interventions for adults and children with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Specialised Register of trials, clinical trials registers, reference lists of included studies and review articles, and relevant manufacturers' websites up to 13 December 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials of any duration that included adults or children with a diagnosis of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis assessing self-management interventions delivered in any form. Self-management interventions included at least two of the following elements: patient education, airway clearance techniques, adherence to medication, exercise (including pulmonary rehabilitation) and action plans. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened searches, extracted study characteristics and outcome data and assessed risk of bias for each included study. Primary outcomes were, health-related quality of life, exacerbation frequency and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were the number of participants admitted to hospital on at least one occasion, lung function, symptoms, self-efficacy and economic costs. We used a random effects model for analyses and standard Cochrane methods throughout. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies with a total of 84 participants were included: a 12-month RCT of early rehabilitation in adults of mean age 72 years conducted in two centres in England (UK) and a six-month proof-of-concept RCT of an expert patient programme (EPP) in adults of mean age 60 years in a single regional respiratory centre in Northern Ireland (UK). The EPP was delivered in group format once a week for eight weeks using standardised EPP materials plus disease-specific education including airway clearance techniques, dealing with symptoms, exacerbations, health promotion and available support. We did not find any studies that included children. Data aggregation was not possible and findings are reported narratively in the review.For the primary outcomes, both studies reported health-related quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), but there was no clear evidence of benefit. In one study, the mean SGRQ total scores were not significantly different at 6 weeks', 3 months' and 12 months' follow-up (12 months mean difference (MD) -10.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) -45.15 to 24.61). In the second study there were no significant differences in SGRQ. Total scores were not significantly different between groups (six months, MD 3.20, 95% CI -6.64 to 13.04). We judged the evidence for this outcome as low or very low. Neither of the included studies reported data on exacerbations requiring antibiotics. For serious adverse events, one study reported more deaths in the intervention group compared to the control group, (intervention: 4 of 8, control: 2 of 12), though interpretation is limited by the low event rate and the small number of participants in each group.For our secondary outcomes, there was no evidence of benefit in terms of frequency of hospital admissions or FEV1 L, based on very low-quality evidence. One study reported self-efficacy using the Chronic Disease Self-Efficacy scale, which comprises 10 components. All scales showed significant benefit from the intervention but effects were only sustained to study endpoint on the Managing Depression scale. Further details are reported in the main review. Based on overall study quality, we judged this evidence as low quality. Neither study reported data on respiratory symptoms, economic costs or adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to determine whether self-management interventions benefit people with bronchiectasis. In the absence of high-quality evidence it is advisable that practitioners adhere to current international guidelines that advocate self-management for people with bronchiectasis.Future studies should aim to clearly define and justify the specific nature of self-management, measure clinically important outcomes and include children as well as adults.

Costs of an ostomy self-management training program for cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: To measure incremental expenses to an oncologic surgical practice for delivering a community-based, ostomy nurse-led, small-group, behavior skills-training intervention to help bladder and colorectal cancer survivors understand and adjust to their ostomies and improve their health-related quality of life, as well as assist family caregivers to understand survivors' needs and provide appropriate supportive care. METHODS: The intervention was a 5-session group behavior skills training in ostomy self-management following the principles of the Chronic Care Model. Faculty included Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nurses (WOCNs) using an ostomy care curriculum. A gender-matched peer-in-time buddy was assigned to each ostomy survivor. The 4-session survivor curriculum included the following: self-management practice and solving immediate ostomy concerns; social well-being; healthy lifestyle; and a booster session. The single family caregiver session was coled by a WOCN and an ostomy peer staff member and covered relevant caregiver and ostomate support issues. Each cohort required 8 weeks to complete the intervention. Nonlabor inputs included ostomy supplies, teaching materials, automobile mileage for WOCNs, mailing, and meeting space rental. Intervention personnel were employed by the University of Arizona. Labor expenses included salaries and fringe benefits. RESULTS: The total incremental expense per intervention cohort of 4 survivors was $7246 or $1812 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: A WOCN-led group self-help ostomy survivorship intervention provided affordable, effective, care to cancer survivors with ostomies.