Budget impact of the Walk With Ease program for knee osteoarthritis.

Objective: Walk With Ease (WWE) is an effective low-cost walking program. We estimated the budget impact of implementing WWE in persons with knee osteoarthritis (OA) as a measure of affordability that can inform payers' funding decisions. Methods: We estimated changes in two-year healthcare costs with and without WWE. We used the Osteoarthritis Policy (OAPol) Model to estimate per-person medical expenditures. We estimated total and per-member-per-month (PMPM) costs of funding WWE for a hypothetical insurance plan with 75,000 members under two conditions: 1) all individuals aged 45+ with knee OA eligible for WWE, and 2) inactive and insufficiently active individuals aged 45+ with knee OA eligible. In sensitivity analyses, we varied WWE cost and efficacy and considered productivity costs. Results: With eligibility unrestricted by activity level, implementing WWE results in an additional $1,002,408 to the insurance plan over two years ($0.56 PMPM). With eligibility restricted to inactive and insufficiently active individuals, funding WWE results in an additional $571,931 over two years ($0.32 PMPM). In sensitivity analyses, when per-person costs of $10 to $1000 were added with 10-50% decreases in failure rate (enhanced sustainability of WWE benefits), two-year budget impact varied from $242,684 to $6,985,674 with unrestricted eligibility and from -$43,194 (cost-saving) to $4,484,122 with restricted eligibility. Conclusion: Along with the cost-effectiveness of WWE at widely accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds, these results can inform payers in deciding to fund WWE. In the absence of accepted thresholds to define affordability, these results can assist in comparing the affordability of WWE with other behavioral interventions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Community-Based Diet and Exercise for Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis and Obesity or Overweight.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity exacerbates pain and functional limitation in persons with knee osteoarthritis (OA). In the Weight Loss and Exercise for Communities with Arthritis in North Carolina (WE-CAN) study, a community-based diet and exercise (D + E) intervention led to an additional 6 kg weight loss and 20% greater pain relief in persons with knee OA and body mass index (BMI) >27 kg/m2 relative to a group-based health education (HE) intervention. We sought to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of the usual care (UC), UC + HE, and UC + (D + E) programs, comparing each strategy with the "next-best" strategy ranked by increasing lifetime cost. METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model to project long-term clinical and economic benefits of the WE-CAN interventions. We considered three strategies: UC, UC + HE, and UC + (D + E). We derived cohort characteristics, weight, and pain reduction from the WE-CAN trial. Our outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: In a cohort with mean age 65 years, BMI 37 kg/m2, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain score 38 (scale 0-100, 100 = worst), UC leads to 9.36 QALYs/person, compared with 9.44 QALYs for UC + HE and 9.49 QALYS for UC + (D + E). The corresponding lifetime costs are $147,102, $148,139, and $151,478. From the societal perspective, UC + HE leads to an ICER of $12,700/QALY; adding D + E to UC leads to an ICER of $61,700/QALY. CONCLUSION: The community-based D + E program for persons with knee OA and BMI >27kg/m2 could be cost-effective for willingness-to-pay thresholds greater than $62,000/QALY. These findings suggest that incorporation of community-based D + E programs into OA care may be beneficial for public health.

Walk with ease for knee osteoarthritis: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective: The Walk With Ease (WWE) program was developed by the Arthritis Foundation to help people with arthritis learn to exercise safely and improve arthritis symptoms. We sought to establish the value of the WWE program. Methods: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy (OAPol) Model, a widely published and validated computer simulation of knee osteoarthritis (OA), to assess the cost-effectiveness of WWE in knee OA. We derived model inputs using data from a workplace wellness initiative in Montana that offered WWE to state employees. Our primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs over a 2-year period, which we used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The base case analysis was restricted to subjects who were inactive or insufficiently active (<180 â€‹min/week of PA) at baseline. We performed scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to determine the impact of uncertainty in model parameters on our results. Results: In the base case analysis, adding WWE to usual care resulted in an ICER of $47,900/QALY. When the program was offered without preselection by baseline activity level, the ICER for WWE â€‹+ â€‹usual care was estimated at $83,400/QALY. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that WWE offered to inactive or insufficiently active individuals has a 52% chance of having an ICER <$50,000/QALY. Conclusion: The WWE program offers good value for inactive/insufficiently active individuals. Payers may consider including such a program to increase physical activity in individuals with knee OA.

Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Weight-Loss Interventions for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and Class III Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Class III obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥40 kg/m2 ) is associated with worse knee pain and total knee replacement (TKR) outcomes. Because bariatric surgery yields sustainable weight loss for individuals with BMI ≥40 kg/m2 , our objective was to establish the value of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in conjunction with usual care for knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients with BMI ≥40 kg/m2 . METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy model to assess long-term clinical benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of RYGB and LSG. We derived model inputs for efficacy, costs, and complications associated with these treatments from published data. Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), all discounted at 3%/year. This analysis was conducted from a health care sector perspective. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate uncertainty in input parameters. RESULTS: The usual care + RYGB strategy increased the quality-adjusted life expectancy by 1.35 years and lifetime costs by $7,209, compared to usual care alone (ICER = $5,300/QALY). The usual care + LSG strategy yielded less benefit than usual care + RYGB and was dominated. Relative to usual care alone, both usual care + RYGB and usual care + LSG reduced opioid use from 13% to 4%, and increased TKR usage from 30% to 50% and 41%, respectively. For cohorts with BMI between 38 and 41 kg/m2 , usual care + LSG dominated usual care + RYGB. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, usual care + RYGB and usual care + LSG were cost-effective in 70% and 30% of iterations, respectively. CONCLUSION: RYGB offers good value among knee OA patients with BMI ≥40 kg/m2 , while LSG may provide good value among those with BMI between 35 and 41 kg/m2 .

Cost-Effectiveness of Weight-Loss Interventions Prior to Total Knee Replacement for Patients With Class III Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Class III obesity (body mass index >40 kg/m2 ) is associated with higher complications following total knee replacement (TKR), and weight loss is recommended. We aimed to establish the cost-effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and lifestyle nonsurgical weight loss (LNSWL) interventions in knee osteoarthritis patients with class III obesity considering TKR. METHODS: Using the Osteoarthritis Policy model and data from published literature to derive model inputs for RYGB, LSG, LNSWL, and TKR, we assessed the long-term clinical benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of weight-loss interventions for patients with class III obesity considering TKR. We assessed the following strategies with a health care sector perspective: 1) no weight loss/no TKR, 2) immediate TKR, 3) LNSWL, 4) LSG, and 5) RYGB. Each weight-loss strategy was followed by annual TKR reevaluation. Primary outcomes were cost, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 3% per year. We conducted deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of conclusions to input uncertainty. RESULTS: LSG increased QALE by 1.64 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime medical costs by $17,347 compared to no intervention, leading to an ICER of $10,600/QALY. RYGB increased QALE by 0.22 and costs by $4,607 beyond LSG, resulting in an ICER of $20,500/QALY. Relative to immediate TKR, LSG and RYGB delayed and decreased TKR utilization. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RYGB was cost-effective in 67% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSION: For patients with class III obesity considering TKR, RYGB provides good value while immediate TKR without weight loss is not economically efficient.

Budget Impact of Funding an Intensive Diet and Exercise Program for Overweight and Obese Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Diet and exercise (D+E) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is effective and cost-effective. However, cost-effectiveness does not imply affordability; the impact of knee OA-specific D+E programs on insurer budgets is unknown. METHODS: We estimated changes in undiscounted medical expenditures (2016 US dollars) with and without a D+E program. We accounted for both additional program outlays and potential savings from reduced use of other knee OA treatments and from reduced incidence of comorbidities. We adopted the perspective of a representative commercial insurance plan covering 200 000 individuals aged 25 to 64 years and a representative Medicare Advantage plan covering 200 000 Medicare-eligible individuals aged 65 years and older. We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated microsimulation model of knee OA, to model D+E efficacy (measured by pain and weight reduction), adherence, and price based on the Intensive Diet and Exercise for Arthritis (IDEA) trial. In sensitivity analyses, we varied time horizon, D+E efficacy, and D+E price. RESULTS: Over 3 years, the D+E program increased spending by $752 200 ($0.10 per member per month [PMPM]) in the commercial plan and by $6.0 million ($0.84 PMPM) in the Medicare plan. Over 3 years, the D+E program reduced opioid use by 6% and 5% and reduced total knee replacements by 5% and 4% in the commercial and Medicare plans, respectively. Expenses were higher in the Medicare plan because it had more patients with knee OA than the commercial plan. CONCLUSION: Although there is no established threshold to define affordability, a D+E program for knee OA would likely produce expenditures comparable with outlays for other health-promotion interventions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Diet and Exercise for Overweight and Obese Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The Intensive Diet and Exercise for Arthritis (IDEA) trial showed that an intensive diet and exercise (D+E) program led to a mean 10.6-kg weight reduction and 51% pain reduction in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of the current study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of adding this D+E program to treatment in overweight and obese (body mass index >27 kg/m2 ) patients with knee OA. METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs for overweight and obese patients with knee OA, with and without the D+E program. We evaluated cost-effectiveness with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a ratio of the differences in lifetime cost and QALYs between treatment strategies. We considered 3 cost-effectiveness thresholds: $50,000/QALY, $100,000/QALY, and $200,000/QALY. Analyses were conducted from health care sector and societal perspectives and used a lifetime horizon. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% per year. D+E characteristics were derived from the IDEA trial. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) were used to evaluate parameter uncertainty and the effect of extending the duration of the D+E program. RESULTS: In the base case, D+E led to 0.054 QALYs gained per person and cost $1,845 from the health care sector perspective and $1,624 from the societal perspective. This resulted in ICERs of $34,100/QALY and $30,000/QALY. In the health care sector perspective PSA, D+E had 58% and 100% likelihoods of being cost-effective with thresholds of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adding D+E to usual care for overweight and obese patients with knee OA is cost-effective and should be implemented in clinical practice.

The effect of randomization to weight loss on total mortality in older overweight and obese adults: the ADAPT Study.

BACKGROUND: Although weight loss reduces risk for comorbid diseases, many observational studies suggest that weight loss is associated with increased mortality risk, leading to reluctance by clinicians to consider weight reduction as a strategy to maintain health and independence in older adults. However, whether the observed weight loss is intentional is difficult to determine and may not accurately represent the mortality risk associated with intentional weight reduction. Data from the Arthritis, Diet, and Activity Promotion Trial (ADAPT) were used to determine whether randomization to a weight reduction program was associated with total mortality in overweight/obese older adults. METHODS: ADAPT (n = 318; mean age 69 +/- 6 years, body mass index 34 +/- 5 kg/m2, 72% female) assessed the influence of weight loss (achieved through dietary counseling and lifestyle modification) and/or exercise on function in overweight/obese older adults with knee osteoarthritis. ADAPT ended in December 1999. Participant vital was ascertained status through December 2006 using the National Death and Social Security Indexes. RESULTS: The mortality rate for those randomized to the 18-month weight loss intervention (n = 159, mean weight loss = -4.8 kg, 15 deaths) was lower than that for those not randomized to the weight loss intervention (n = 159, mean weight loss = -1.4 kg, 30 deaths; hazard rate ratio = 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.3-1.0). Results were not appreciably changed when analyses were stratified by age, gender, baseline weight status, or magnitude of weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults, intentional weight loss was not associated with increased total mortality and may reduce mortality risk. Observational studies of weight loss, especially when intentionality cannot be rigorously established, may be misleading with respect to the effect of weight loss on mortality.

Cost-effectiveness of exercise and diet in overweight and obese adults with knee osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of dietary and exercise interventions in overweight or obese elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) enrolled in the Arthritis, Diet, and Physical Activity Promotion Trial (ADAPT). METHODS: ADAPT was a single-blinded, controlled trial of 316 adults with knee OA, randomized to one of four groups: Healthy Lifestyle Control group, Diet group, Exercise group, or Exercise and Diet group. A cost analysis was performed from a payer perspective, incorporating those costs and benefits that would be realized by a managed care organization interested in maintaining the health and satisfaction of its enrollees while reducing unnecessary utilization of health care services. RESULTS: The Diet intervention was most cost-effective for reducing weight, at $35 for each percentage point reduction in baseline body weight. The Exercise intervention was most cost-effective for improving mobility, costing $10 for each percentage point improvement in a 6-min walking distance and $9 for each percentage point improvement in the timed stair climbing task. The Exercise and Diet intervention was most cost-effective for improving self-reported function and symptoms of arthritis, costing $24 for each percentage point improvement in subjective function, $20 for each percentage point improvement in self-reported pain, and $56 for each percentage point improvement in self-reported stiffness. CONCLUSIONS: The Exercise and Diet intervention consistently yielded the greatest improvements in weight, physical performance, and symptoms of knee OA. However, it was also the most expensive and was the most cost-effective approach only for the subjective outcomes of knee OA (self-reported function, pain, and stiffness). Perceived function and symptoms of knee OA are likely to be stronger drivers of downstream health service utilization than weight, or objective performance measures and may be the most cost-effective in the long term.