The cost-effectiveness of an online intervention to prevent dementia: Results from the Maintain Your Brain (MYB) randomised controlled trial.

IF 4.3 Q2 BUSINESS
Heidi J Welberry, Li-Jung Elizabeth Ku, Sophy Tf Shih, Louisa R Jorm, Maria Fiatarone Singh, Michael Valenzuela, Jeewani Anupama Ginige, Kaarin J Anstey, Perminder S Sachdev, John J McNeil, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Megan Heffernan, Tiffany Chau, Henry Brodaty
{"title":"The cost-effectiveness of an online intervention to prevent dementia: Results from the Maintain Your Brain (MYB) randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Heidi J Welberry, Li-Jung Elizabeth Ku, Sophy Tf Shih, Louisa R Jorm, Maria Fiatarone Singh, Michael Valenzuela, Jeewani Anupama Ginige, Kaarin J Anstey, Perminder S Sachdev, John J McNeil, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Megan Heffernan, Tiffany Chau, Henry Brodaty","doi":"10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Maintain Your Brain (MYB) randomised controlled trial (RCT) examined the effect of a multi-domain internet-based dementia prevention program against a control group (information only).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>A cost-effective analysis (CEA) quantified the differences in costs (direct healthcare and program costs) and effectiveness outcomes between the intervention and control groups from a healthcare sector perspective.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An economic evaluation was conducted alongside the MYB RCT over three years.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Australians aged 55-77 years with at least 2 identified remediable risk factors for cognitive decline/dementia recruited from communities in New South Wales.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>There were 3,025 participants in the intervention group and 3,033 in the control group with available linked healthcare data via the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study out of the 6104 enrolled in the trial (99.2% of total cohort).</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The MYB trial comprised a personalised schedule of online coaching in physical activity, nutrition, cognitive activity, and depression or anxiety management.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The two effectiveness outcomes were global cognition composite (GCC) scores and the Australian National University-Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index -short form (ANU-ADRI-SF) questionnaire scores. Costs included MYB program costs and the direct healthcare costs incurred by the MYB participants. All costs were reported in Australian dollars (AUD$) during the trial period. The time horizon of this analysis was 3 years after randomisation (2018-2021). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) between the intervention and the control groups were calculated by comparing the average difference in costs to a mean difference in z score for GCC and ANU-ADRI-SF score using the bootstrapped means and 95% Confidence Intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The total unadjusted program and healthcare costs over three years were similar between groups (AUD$16,521 per person in the control group and AUD$16,473 in the intervention group). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the average difference between groups in total cost per person at three years was not statistically different: AUD$467 favouring the control group (95%CI: -$552 - $1585). This was compared to a significant mean difference (improvement) in GCC z score at three years of 0.18 (95%CI: 0.13, 0.23) and -0.57 (95%CI: -0.95, -0.24) point difference in ANU-ADRI-SF for the intervention versus control. The base case ICERs were AUD$2,568 per 1 standard deviation in z score and $823 per reduction of 1 ANU-ADRI-SF point. With 1000 bootstrapped replications, the scatterplots of ICER ellipses suggest that the MYB intervention was more effective than the control group and with no significant difference in overall healthcare costs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MYB trial showed cost-effectiveness for preventing cognitive decline and reducing dementia risk. Longer-term follow-up and dissemination to other cohorts is needed to confirm the impact on preventing future cases of dementia and relevance to other socio-economic and cultural/ethnic groups than those enrolled in the original trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":22711,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","volume":" ","pages":"100151"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Maintain Your Brain (MYB) randomised controlled trial (RCT) examined the effect of a multi-domain internet-based dementia prevention program against a control group (information only).

Objectives: A cost-effective analysis (CEA) quantified the differences in costs (direct healthcare and program costs) and effectiveness outcomes between the intervention and control groups from a healthcare sector perspective.

Design: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside the MYB RCT over three years.

Setting: Australians aged 55-77 years with at least 2 identified remediable risk factors for cognitive decline/dementia recruited from communities in New South Wales.

Participants: There were 3,025 participants in the intervention group and 3,033 in the control group with available linked healthcare data via the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study out of the 6104 enrolled in the trial (99.2% of total cohort).

Intervention: The MYB trial comprised a personalised schedule of online coaching in physical activity, nutrition, cognitive activity, and depression or anxiety management.

Measurements: The two effectiveness outcomes were global cognition composite (GCC) scores and the Australian National University-Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index -short form (ANU-ADRI-SF) questionnaire scores. Costs included MYB program costs and the direct healthcare costs incurred by the MYB participants. All costs were reported in Australian dollars (AUD$) during the trial period. The time horizon of this analysis was 3 years after randomisation (2018-2021). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) between the intervention and the control groups were calculated by comparing the average difference in costs to a mean difference in z score for GCC and ANU-ADRI-SF score using the bootstrapped means and 95% Confidence Intervals.

Results: The total unadjusted program and healthcare costs over three years were similar between groups (AUD$16,521 per person in the control group and AUD$16,473 in the intervention group). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the average difference between groups in total cost per person at three years was not statistically different: AUD$467 favouring the control group (95%CI: -$552 - $1585). This was compared to a significant mean difference (improvement) in GCC z score at three years of 0.18 (95%CI: 0.13, 0.23) and -0.57 (95%CI: -0.95, -0.24) point difference in ANU-ADRI-SF for the intervention versus control. The base case ICERs were AUD$2,568 per 1 standard deviation in z score and $823 per reduction of 1 ANU-ADRI-SF point. With 1000 bootstrapped replications, the scatterplots of ICER ellipses suggest that the MYB intervention was more effective than the control group and with no significant difference in overall healthcare costs.

Conclusion: The MYB trial showed cost-effectiveness for preventing cognitive decline and reducing dementia risk. Longer-term follow-up and dissemination to other cohorts is needed to confirm the impact on preventing future cases of dementia and relevance to other socio-economic and cultural/ethnic groups than those enrolled in the original trial.

预防痴呆症在线干预的成本效益:维护你的大脑(MYB)随机对照试验的结果。
背景:维护你的大脑(MYB)随机对照试验(RCT)检查了多领域基于互联网的痴呆预防计划对对照组的影响(仅提供信息)。目的:一项成本效益分析(CEA)从医疗保健部门的角度量化了干预组和对照组之间的成本差异(直接医疗保健和项目成本)和有效性结果。设计:与MYB RCT一起进行了为期三年的经济评估。研究对象:年龄在55-77岁之间的澳大利亚人,至少有两种认知能力下降/痴呆的可补救风险因素,从新南威尔士州的社区招募。参与者:干预组有3025名参与者,对照组有3033名参与者,其中6104名参与者(占总队列的99.2%)通过Sax研究所的45和Up研究获得了相关的医疗数据。干预:MYB试验包括在体育活动、营养、认知活动和抑郁或焦虑管理方面的个性化在线指导计划。测量:两个有效性结果是全球认知综合(GCC)得分和澳大利亚国立大学-阿尔茨海默病风险指数-简短形式(anu - adrii - sf)问卷得分。成本包括MYB项目成本和MYB参与者产生的直接医疗成本。在试验期间,所有费用均以澳元(AUD$)报告。该分析的时间范围为随机化后3年(2018-2021年)。干预组和对照组之间的增量成本-效果比(ICERs)是通过比较成本的平均差异与GCC和anu - adrii - sf评分的z分数的平均差异来计算的,使用自助平均数和95%置信区间。结果:三年内,两组之间的总未调整计划和医疗保健费用相似(对照组每人16,521澳元,干预组每人16,473澳元)。在调整基线特征后,三年内两组间人均总成本的平均差异没有统计学差异:对照组为467澳元(95%CI: - 552 - 1585美元)。这与干预组与对照组相比,GCC z评分在三年内的显著平均差异(改善)为0.18 (95%CI: 0.13, 0.23)和-0.57 (95%CI: -0.95, -0.24)点差。基本情况ICERs为z分数每1个标准差2,568澳元,每减少1个anu - adrii - sf点823澳元。在1000个自举重复中,ICER椭圆的散点图表明,MYB干预比对照组更有效,在总体医疗成本上没有显著差异。结论:MYB试验在预防认知能力下降和降低痴呆风险方面具有成本效益。需要对其他队列进行长期随访和传播,以确认对预防未来痴呆病例的影响以及与原始试验中纳入的其他社会经济和文化/种族群体的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The JPAD Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’Disease will publish reviews, original research articles and short reports to improve our knowledge in the field of Alzheimer prevention including: neurosciences, biomarkers, imaging, epidemiology, public health, physical cognitive exercise, nutrition, risk and protective factors, drug development, trials design, and heath economic outcomes.JPAD will publish also the meeting abstracts from Clinical Trial on Alzheimer Disease (CTAD) and will be distributed both in paper and online version worldwide.We hope that JPAD with your contribution will play a role in the development of Alzheimer prevention.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信