RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation is an essential medical service for patients who have suffered acute stroke. Although the effectiveness of 7-days-per-week rehabilitation schedule has been studied in comparison with 5- or 6-days-per-week rehabilitation schedule, its cost-effectiveness has not been analyzed. In this research, to help formulate more cost-effective medical treatments for acute stroke patients, we analyzed the cost-effectiveness of 7-days-per-week rehabilitation for acute stroke from public health payer's perspective, and public healthcare and long-term care payer's perspective in Japan. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness of 7-days-per-week rehabilitation for acute stroke patients was analyzed based on the result from a previous study using a Japanese database examining the efficacy of 7-days-per-week rehabilitation. Cost utility analysis was conducted by comparing 7-days-per-week rehabilitation with 5- or 6-days-per-week rehabilitation, with its main outcome incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) calculated by dividing estimated incremental medical and long-term care costs by incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The costs were estimated using the Japanese fee table and from published sources. The time horizon was 5 years, and Markov modeling was used for the analysis. RESULTS: The ICER was $6339/QALY from public health payer's perspective, lower than 5,000,000 Yen/QALY (approximately US$37,913), which was the willingness-to-pay used for the cost-effectiveness evaluation in Japan. The 7-day-per-week rehabilitation was dominant from public healthcare and long-term care payer's perspective. The result of sensitivity analysis confirmed the results. CONCLUSION: The results indicated that 7-days-per-week rehabilitation for acute stroke rehabilitation was likely to be cost-effective.