Cost-Effectiveness of an Extended-Role General Practitioner Clinic for Persistent Physical Symptoms: Results From the Multiple Symptoms Study 3 Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.
Aileen R Neilson, Cara Mooney, Laura Sutton, David White, Jeremy Dawson, Gillian Rowlands, Ruth E Thomas, Jonathan Woodward, Vincent Deary, Christopher Burton
{"title":"Cost-Effectiveness of an Extended-Role General Practitioner Clinic for Persistent Physical Symptoms: Results From the Multiple Symptoms Study 3 Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Aileen R Neilson, Cara Mooney, Laura Sutton, David White, Jeremy Dawson, Gillian Rowlands, Ruth E Thomas, Jonathan Woodward, Vincent Deary, Christopher Burton","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.09.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an extended-role general practitioner symptoms clinic (SC), added to usual care (UC) for patients with multiple persistent physical symptoms (sometimes known as medically unexplained symptoms).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a 52-week within-trial cost-utility analysis of a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing SC + UC (n = 178) with UC alone (n = 176), conducted from the primary perspective of the UK National Health Service and personal and social services (PSS). Base-case quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were measured using EQ-5D-5L. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Cost-effectiveness results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and incremental net monetary benefits. Uncertainty was explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (using 1000 nonparametric bootstrapped samples) and sensitivity analysis (including societal costs, using SF-6D and ICECAP-A capability measure for adults outcomes to estimate QALYs and years of full capability, respectively, varying intervention costs, missing data mechanism assumptions).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Multiple imputation analysis showed that compared with UC alone, SC + UC was more expensive (adjusted mean cost difference: 704; 95% CI £605-£807) and more effective (adjusted mean QALY difference: 0.0447; 95% CI 0.0067-0.0826), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15 765/QALY, incremental net monetary benefit of £189.22 (95% CI -£573.62 to £948.28) and a 69% probability of the SC + UC intervention arm being cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Results were robust to most sensitivity analyses but sensitive to missing data assumptions (2 of the 8 scenarios investigated), SF-6D, and ICECAP_A capability measure for adults quality-of-life outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A symptoms clinic is likely to be a potentially cost-effective treatment for patients with persistent physical symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.09.015","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an extended-role general practitioner symptoms clinic (SC), added to usual care (UC) for patients with multiple persistent physical symptoms (sometimes known as medically unexplained symptoms).
Methods: This was a 52-week within-trial cost-utility analysis of a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing SC + UC (n = 178) with UC alone (n = 176), conducted from the primary perspective of the UK National Health Service and personal and social services (PSS). Base-case quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were measured using EQ-5D-5L. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Cost-effectiveness results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and incremental net monetary benefits. Uncertainty was explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (using 1000 nonparametric bootstrapped samples) and sensitivity analysis (including societal costs, using SF-6D and ICECAP-A capability measure for adults outcomes to estimate QALYs and years of full capability, respectively, varying intervention costs, missing data mechanism assumptions).
Results: Multiple imputation analysis showed that compared with UC alone, SC + UC was more expensive (adjusted mean cost difference: 704; 95% CI £605-£807) and more effective (adjusted mean QALY difference: 0.0447; 95% CI 0.0067-0.0826), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15 765/QALY, incremental net monetary benefit of £189.22 (95% CI -£573.62 to £948.28) and a 69% probability of the SC + UC intervention arm being cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Results were robust to most sensitivity analyses but sensitive to missing data assumptions (2 of the 8 scenarios investigated), SF-6D, and ICECAP_A capability measure for adults quality-of-life outcomes.
Conclusions: A symptoms clinic is likely to be a potentially cost-effective treatment for patients with persistent physical symptoms.
期刊介绍：
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
