Shared care versus hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation: a cost-utility analysis based on a randomised controlled trial

Cost and effects of integrated care: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Health and care services are becoming increasingly strained and healthcare authorities worldwide are investing in integrated care in the hope of delivering higher-quality services while containing costs. The cost-effectiveness of integrated care, however, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to appraise current economic evaluations of integrated care and assesses the impact on outcomes and costs.

METHODS

CINAHL, DARE, EMBASE, Medline/PubMed, NHS EED, OECD Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and WHOLIS databases from inception to 31 December 2019 were searched to identify studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of integrated care. Study quality was assessed using an adapted CHEERS checklist and used as weight in a random-effects meta-analysis to estimate mean cost and mean outcomes of integrated care.

RESULTS

Selected studies achieved a relatively low average quality score of 65.0% (± 18.7%). Overall meta-analyses from 34 studies showed a significant decrease in costs (0.94; CI 0.90-0.99) and a statistically significant improvement in outcomes (1.06; CI 1.05-1.08) associated with integrated care compared to the control. There is substantial heterogeneity in both costs and outcomes across subgroups. Results were significant in studies lasting over 12 months (12 studies), with both a decrease in cost (0.87; CI 0.80-0.94) and improvement in outcomes (1.15; 95% CI 1.11-1.18) for integrated care interventions; whereas, these associations were not significant in studies with follow-up less than a year.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that integrated care is likely to reduce cost and improve outcome. However, existing evidence varies largely and is of moderate quality. Future economic evaluation should target methodological issues to aid policy decisions with more robust evidence on the cost-effectiveness of integrated care.

Protocol for the economic evaluation of metacognitive therapy for cardiac rehabilitation participants with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is offered to reduce the risk of further cardiac events and to improve patients' health and quality of life following a cardiac event. Psychological care is a common component of CR as symptoms of depression and/or anxiety are more prevalent in this population, however evidence for the cost-effectiveness of current interventions is limited. Metacognitive therapy (MCT), is a recent treatment development that is effective in treating anxiety and depression in mental health settings and is being evaluated in CR patients. This protocol describes the planned approach to the economic evaluation of MCT for CR patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The economic evaluation work will consist of a within-trial analysis and an economic model. The PATHWAY Group MCT study has been prospectively designed to collect comprehensive self-reported resource use and health outcome data, including the EQ-5D, within a randomised controlled trial study design (UK Clinical Trials Gateway). A within-trial economic evaluation and economic model will compare the cost-effectiveness of MCT plus usual care (UC) to UC, from a health and social care perspective in the UK. The within-trial analysis will use intention-to-treat and estimate total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for the trial follow-up. Single imputation will be used to impute missing baseline variables. Multiple imputation will be used to impute values missing at follow-up. Items of resource use will be multiplied by published national healthcare costs. Regression analysis will be used to estimate net costs and net QALYs and these estimates will be bootstrapped to generate 10 000 net pairs of costs and QALYs to inform the probability of cost-effectiveness. A decision analytical economic model will be developed to synthesise trial data with the published literature over a longer time frame. Sensitivity analysis will explore uncertainty. Guidance of the methods for economic models will be followed and dissemination will adhere to reporting guidelines.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The economic evaluation includes a within-trial analysis. The trial which included the collection of this data was reviewed and approved by Ethics. Ethics approval was obtained by the Preston Research Ethics Committee (project ID 156862). The modelling analysis is not applicable for Ethics as it will use data from the trial (secondary analysis) and the published literature. Results of the main trial and economic evaluation will be published in the peer-reviewed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) journals library (Programme Grants for Applied Research), submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at appropriate conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN74643496; Pre-results.

Cultural adoption, and validation of the Persian version of the coronary artery disease education questionnaire (CADE-Q): a second-order confirmatory factor analysis

BACKGROUND

Evaluating knowledge in patients with coronary artery disease requires a specific measure. The aim of the present study was to translate and evaluate the CADE-Q in patients with coronary artery disease in Iran.

METHODS

Forward-backward procedure was applied to translate the questionnaire from English into Persian. Then a cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate psychometric properties of the questionnaire. A sample of patients with coronary artery disease attending to cardiac departments of teaching hospitals affiliated to medical universities in Tehran, Iran completed the 19-item CADE-Q from April to December 2017. Structural validity of CADE-Q was assessed using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Reliability was examined using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Stability was evaluated by estimation intraclass correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

In all 500 patients participated in the study. The mean age of patients was 53.63. (SD = 14.36) years, and 57% were male. The results obtained from the exploratory factor analysis showed a four factor solution (lifestyle habits and exercise, risk factors, diagnosis and treatment, signals & symptoms and medicine) that jointly explained 48.9% of the total variance observed. However, the second-order confirmatory factor analysis supported the three-factor solution while convergent and divergent validity were not confirmed. Finally, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.84 ranging from 0.50 to 0.82 was obtained for the scale and its subscales. In addition, the ICC value of 0.88 showed satisfactory stability for the questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

The Coronary Artery Disease Education Questionnaire was found to be a multidimensional instrument. The results confirmed the factor structure of the questionnaire with a second-order analysis. Since the convergent and divergent validity of the scale were not confirmed, further assessment is essential to establish fitness of the questionnaire in Iran.

Methodological Quality of Economic Evaluations in Integrated Care: Evidence from a Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this review is to systematically assess the methodological quality of economic evaluations in integrated care and to identify challenges with conducting such studies.

THEORY AND METHODS

Searches of grey-literature and scientific papers were performed, from January 2000 to December 2018. A checklist was developed to assess the quality of economic evaluations. Authors' statements of challenges encountered during their evaluations were qualitatively coded.

RESULTS

Forty-four articles were eligible for inclusion. The review found that study design, measurement of cost and outcomes, statistical analysis and presentation of data were the areas with most quality variation. Authors identified challenges mostly related to time horizon of the evaluation, inadequate or lack of comparator group, contamination bias, and a post-hoc evaluation culture.

DISCUSSION

Our review found significant differences in quality, with some studies showing poor methodological rigor; challenging conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of integrated care.

CONCLUSION

It is essential for evaluators to use best-practice standards when planning and conducting economic evaluations, in order to build a reliable evidence base for decision-making in integrated care.