Cost-Effectiveness of an Individualised Management Program after Stroke: A Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of comprehensive post-stroke programs is limited. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of an individualised management program (IMP) for stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

Methods: A cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial with a 24-month follow-up, from both societal and health system perspectives, was conducted. Adults with stroke/TIA discharged from hospitals were randomised by primary care practice to receive either usual care (UC) or an IMP in addition to UC (intervention). An IMP included stroke-specific nurse-led education and a specialist review of care plans at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months, and telephone reviews by nurses at 6 months and 18 months. Costs were expressed in 2021 Australian dollars (AUD). Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) beyond 12 months were discounted by 5%. The probability of cost-effectiveness of the intervention was determined by quantifying 10,000 bootstrapped iterations of incremental costs and QALYs below the threshold of AUD 50,000/QALY.

Results: Among the 502 participants (65% male, median age 69 years), 251 (50%) were in the intervention group. From a health system perspective, the incremental cost per QALY gained was AUD 53,175 in the intervention compared to the UC group, and the intervention was cost-effective in 46.7% of iterations. From a societal perspective, the intervention was dominant in 52.7% of iterations, with mean per-person costs of AUD 49,045 and 1.352 QALYs compared to mean per-person costs of AUD 51,394 and 1.324 QALYs in the UC group. The probability of the cost-effectiveness of the intervention, from a societal perspective, was 60.5%.

Conclusions: Care for people with stroke/TIA using an IMP was cost-effective from a societal perspective over 24 months. Economic evaluations of prevention programs need sufficient time horizons and consideration of costs beyond direct healthcare utilisation to demonstrate their value to society.