Cost-Effectiveness of Telehealth-Delivered Exercise and Dietary Weight Loss Programs for Knee Osteoarthritis Within a Twelve-Month Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered exercise and diet-plus-exercise programs within 12 months. METHODS: An economic evaluation within a 12-month, 3-arm, parallel randomized trial of two 6-month telehealth-delivered exercise programs, with and without a dietary component. A total of 415 people with knee osteoarthritis ages 45-80 years and body mass index of 28-40 kg/m2 were assigned to 1 of 2 telehealth-delivered exercise programs, 1 without (n = 172) and 1 with (n = 175) a dietary component (ketogenic very low calorie diet), or to an education control (n = 67), for 6 months, with 6 months follow-up. The primary economic outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health system costs. Measured costs were the direct intervention (consultations, equipment/resources, and meal replacements) and health care use in 2020 Australian dollars ($AU1.5 = $US1). Secondary analysis included weight loss and work productivity gains. RESULTS: The clinical trial demonstrated greater improvements in pain and function compared to information only for individuals with knee osteoarthritis and overweight/obesity. We can be 88% confident that diet plus exercise is cost effective ($45,500 per QALY), 53% confident that exercise is cost-effective ($67,600 per QALY) compared to the control, and 86% confident that augmenting exercise with the diet program is cost effective ($21,100 per QALY). CONCLUSION: Telehealth-delivered programs targeting exercise with dietary intervention for people with knee osteoarthritis who have overweight/obesity are likely to be cost-effective, particularly if potential long-term gains from weight loss and work productivity are realized.

Risk-stratified and stepped models of care for back pain and osteoarthritis: are we heading towards a common model?

The overall quality of care for musculoskeletal pain conditions is suboptimal, partly due to a considerable evidence-practice gap. In osteoarthritis and low back pain, structured models of care exist to help overcome that challenge. In osteoarthritis, focus is on stepped care models, where treatment decisions are guided by response to treatment, and increasingly comprehensive interventions are only offered to people with inadequate response to more simple care. In low back pain, the most widely known approach is based on risk stratification, where patients with higher predicted risk of poor outcome are offered more comprehensive care. For both conditions, the recommended interventions and models of care share many commonalities and there is no evidence that one model of care is more effective than the other. Limitations of existing models of care include a lack of integrated information on social factors, comorbid conditions, and previous treatment experience, and they do not support an interplay between health care, self-management, and community-based activities. Moving forwards, a common model across musculoskeletal conditions seems realistic, which points to an opportunity for reducing the complexity of implementation. We foresee this development will use big data sources and machine-learning methods to combine stepped and risk-stratified care and to integrate self-management support and patient-centred care to a greater extent in future models of care.