RESUMEN
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of chin tuck against resistance (CTAR) for citizens suffering from dysphagia compared to the standard municipal treatment in Denmark. Patients and Methods: A cost-utility analysis, employing a municipal perspective, was conducted using cost data collected alongside clinical data of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of CTAR training for citizens with dysphagia. The composition of the clinical randomized controlled trial, which included citizens with different diagnoses, means that participants had different disease courses. Ninety-two citizens from seven different Danish municipalities were enrolled, of whom 43 received standard care, and 49 received CTAR in addition to standard care. The effect outcome of the economic evaluation was quality-adjusted life years (QALY), estimated using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Individual resource consumption of each citizen was determined based on the use of home care, home nursing care, physio- and occupational therapy, dietitian guidance, and hospital admissions. The incremental costs and QALYs between the intervention group (CTAR in addition to standard care) and standard care group were estimated using regression analysis, and sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate the robustness of the results. Results: The base case analysis showed that the intervention group was dominant compared to the standard care group, with a decrease in incremental costs of £542.38 and an increase in incremental QALYs of 0.0118. All sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar findings as the base case analysis, supporting the robustness of the results. Conclusion: This study found that the intervention group was the dominant alternative, hence being more effective and cost-saving, compared to the standard care group in a Danish municipality perspective with a three-month time horizon. This study adds to the scarce evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CTAR in a Danish clinical setting, but further studies should focus on estimating long-term cost-effectiveness.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The use of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) to eradicate intestinal carriage of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) has been described in case reports and small case series. Although few in numbers, these patients suffer from recurrent infections that may exacerbate both the patients' comorbidities and their healths. In the current study, we hypothesized that FMT for MDRO-related urinary tract infections (UTIs) reduces hospitalisations and associated costs. METHODS: In a cohort of patients referred for FMT from 2015 to 2020, we selected all patients who had consecutively been referred for eradication of MRDO carriage with UTIs. An early economic assessment was performed to calculate hospital-related costs. The overall study cohort was registered at ClinicalTrials, study identifier NCT03712722. RESULTS: We consecutively included five patients with UTIs caused by MDROs. Four of the patients were renal transplant recipients. Patients were followed for median 126 days (range 60-320), where the follow-up duration for each patient was aligned with the number of days from the first UTI to FMT. The median number of UTIs per patient dropped from 4 to 0. Investigating hospital costs, hospital admission days dropped by 87% and monthly hospital costs by 79%. CONCLUSIONS: FMT was effective in reducing the occurrence of UTIs and mediated a marked reduction in hospital costs. We suggest that this strategy is cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials, study identifier NCT03712722.