Cost-effectiveness of the COPD Patient Management European Trial home-based disease management program

Efficient management of COPD represents an international challenge. Effective management strategies within the means of limited health care budgets are urgently required. This analysis aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a home-based disease management (DM) intervention vs usual management (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Vol. 14; pp. 645 - 657
Main Authors: Bourbeau, Jean, Granados, Denis, Roze, Stéphane, Durand-Zaleski, Isabelle, Casan, Pere, Köhler, Dieter, Tognella, Silvia, Viejo, Jose Luis, Dal Negro, Roberto W, Kessler, Romain
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: New Zealand Dove Medical Press Limited 01-01-2019
Dove Medical Press Ltd
Dove Medical Press
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Efficient management of COPD represents an international challenge. Effective management strategies within the means of limited health care budgets are urgently required. This analysis aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a home-based disease management (DM) intervention vs usual management (UM) in patients from the COPD Patient Management European Trial (COMET). Cost-effectiveness was evaluated in 319 intention-to-treat patients over 12 months in COMET. The analysis captured unplanned all-cause hospitalization days, mortality, and quality-adjusted life expectancy. Costs were evaluated from a National Health Service perspective for France, Germany, and Spain, and in a pooled analysis, and were expressed in 2015 Euros (EUR). Quality of life was assessed using the 15D health-related quality-of-life instrument and mapped to utility scores. Home-based DM was associated with improved mortality and quality-adjusted life expectancy. DM and UM were associated with equivalent direct costs (DM reduced costs by EUR -37 per patient per year) in the pooled analysis. DM was associated with lower costs in France (EUR -806 per patient per year) and Spain (EUR -51 per patient per year), but higher costs in Germany (EUR 391 per patient per year). Evaluation of cost per death avoided and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained showed that DM was dominant (more QALYs and cost saving) in France and Spain, and cost-effective in Germany vs UM. Nonparametric bootstrapping analysis, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 20,000 per QALY gained, indicated that the probability of home-based DM being cost-effective vs UM was 87.7% in France, 81.5% in Spain, and 75.9% in Germany. Home-based DM improved clinical outcomes at equivalent cost vs UM in France and Spain, and in the pooled analysis. DM was cost-effective in Germany with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 2,541 per QALY gained. The COMET home-based DM intervention could represent an attractive alternative to UM for European health care payers.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:1178-2005
1176-9106
1178-2005
DOI:10.2147/COPD.S173057