首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Age and ageing >Economic evaluation of the differential benefits of home visits with telephone calls and telephone calls only in transitional discharge support
【2h】

Economic evaluation of the differential benefits of home visits with telephone calls and telephone calls only in transitional discharge support

机译:对通过电话和仅在过渡出院支持中的电话进行家访的不同利益进行经济评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: home visits and telephone calls are two often used approaches in transitional care, but their differential economic effects are unknown.>Objective: to examine the differential economic benefits of home visits with telephone calls and telephone calls only in transitional discharge support.>Design: cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT).>Participants: patients discharged from medical units randomly assigned to control (control, N = 210), home visits with calls (home, N = 196) and calls only (call, N = 204).>Methods: cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted from the societal perspective comparing monetary benefits and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.>Results: the home arm was less costly but less effective at 28 days and was dominating (less costly and more effective) at 84 days. The call arm was dominating at both 28 and 84 days. The incremental QALY for the home arm was −0.0002/0.0008 (28/84 days), and the call arm was 0.0022/0.0104 (28/84 days). When the three groups were compared, the call arm had a higher probability being cost-effective at 84 days but not at 28 days (home: 53%, call: 35% (28 days) versus home: 22%, call: 73% (84 days)) measuring against the NICE threshold of £20,000.>Conclusion: the original RCT showed that the bundled intervention involving home visits and calls was more effective than calls only in the reduction of hospital readmissions. This study adds a cost perspective to inform policymakers that both home visits and calls only are cost-effective for transitional care support, but calls only have a higher chance of being cost-effective for a sustained period after intervention.
机译:>背景:家访和打电话是过渡护理中两种常用的方法,但其不同的经济影响尚不得而知。>目的:通过电话和电话仅在过渡出院支持中进行。>设计:成本效益分析与随机对照试验(RCT)一起进行。>参与者:从随机分配的医疗单位出院的患者控制(控制,N = 210),带电话的家访(家庭,N = 196)和仅呼叫(电话,N = 204)。>方法: >结果:家用机价格便宜,但在28天时效果不佳,在84天时占主导地位(成本更低,效果更好)。呼叫部门在28天和84天都处于主导地位。归属部门的增量QALY为-0.0002 / 0.0008(28/84天),而呼叫部门为0.0022 / 0.0104(28/84天)。将这三组进行比较时,呼叫部门在84天而不是28天时具有成本效益的可能性更高(家庭:53%,呼叫:35%(28天),而家庭:22%,呼叫:73% (84天)),以NICE阈值20,000英镑衡量。>结论:原始的RCT显示,包括家访和求诊在内的捆绑干预措施仅在减少住院率方面比求诊更为有效。这项研究增加了一种成本观点,以告知决策者,上门拜访和打电话仅对过渡护理支持具有成本效益,但在干预后的持续时间内,打电话具有较高的成本效益的机会更大。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号