Publications (2)3.94 Total impact
-
Article: Cost-effectiveness of a health-social partnership transitional program for post-discharge medical patients.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Readmissions are costly and have implications for quality of care. Studies have been reported to support effects of transitional care programs in reducing hospital readmissions and enhancing clinical outcomes. However, there is a paucity of studies executing full economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of these transitional care programs. This study is therefore launched to fill this knowledge gap. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial that examined the effects of a Health-Social Transitional Care Management Program (HSTCMP) for medical patients discharged from an acute regional hospital in Hong Kong. The cost and health outcomes were compared between the patients receiving the HSTCMP and usual care. The total costs comprised the pre-program, program, and healthcare utilization costs. Quality of life was measured with SF-36 and transformed to utility values between 0 and 1. RESULTS: The readmission rates within 28 (control 10.2%, study 4.0%) and 84 days (control 19.4%, study 8.1%) were significantly higher in the control group. Utility values showed no difference between the control and study groups at baseline (p = 0.308). Utility values for the study group were significantly higher than in the control group at 28 (p < 0.001) and 84 days (p = 0.002). The study group also had a significantly higher QALYs gain (p < 0.001) over time at 28 and 84 days when compared with the control group. The intervention had an 89% chance of being cost-effective at the threshold of [pound sign]20000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Previous studies on transitional care focused mainly on clinical outcomes and not too many included cost as an outcome measure. Studies examining the cost-effectiveness of the post-discharge support services are scanty. This study is the first to examine the cost-effectiveness of a transitional care program that used nurse-led services participated by volunteers. Results have shown that a health-social partnership transitional care program is cost-effective in reducing healthcare costs and attaining QALY gains. Economic evaluation helps to inform funders and guide decisions for the effective use of competing healthcare resources.BMC Health Services Research 12/2012; 12(1):479. · 1.66 Impact Factor -
Article: A short course of cardiac rehabilitation program is highly cost effective in improving long-term quality of life in patients with recent myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate the long-term effect of a cardiac rehabilitation and prevention program (CRPP) on quality of life (QOL) and its cost effectiveness. Prospective, randomized controlled trial. University-affiliated outpatient cardiac rehabilitation and prevention center. A total of 269 patients (76% men; mean age, 64+/-11 y) with recent acute myocardial infarction (AMI; n=193) or after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; n=76) were randomized in a ratio of 2 to 1. Patients received either CRPP (an 8-wk exercise and education class in phase 2) or conventional therapy without exercise program (control group). They were followed until they had completed all 4 phases of the program (ie, 2 y). QOL assessments, by using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Symptoms Questionnaire, were performed at the end of each phase. Direct health care cost was calculated, whereas cost utility was estimated as money spent (in US dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. In the CRPP group, 6 of the 8 SF-36 dimensions improved significantly by phase 2 and were maintained throughout the study period. Patients were less anxious and depressed, and felt more relaxed and contented. In the control group, none of the SF-36 dimensions were improved by phase 2, and bodily pain was increased. In phase 4, only 4 dimensions were improved. Symptoms were unchanged except for increased hostility score. There was a significant gain in net time trade-off in the CRPP group after phase 2. The direct health care expenses in the CRPP and control groups were 15,292 dollars and 15,707 dollars per patient, respectively. Therefore, the cost utility calculated was 640 dollars saved per QALY gained. Savings attributable to CRPP were primarily explained by the lower rate (13% vs 26% of patients, chi2 test=3.9, P <.05) and cost of subsequent PCI (P =.01). In an era of managing patients with coronary heart disease, a short-course CRPP was highly cost effective in providing better QOL to patients with recent AMI or after elective PCI. In addition, the improvement of QOL was quick and sustained for at least 2 years after CRPP.Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 01/2005; 85(12):1915-22. · 2.28 Impact Factor
