首页> 外文期刊>Age and Ageing: The Journal of the British Geriatrics Society and the British Society for Research on Ageing >Post-acute care for older people in community hospitals--a cost-effectiveness analysis within a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.
【24h】

Post-acute care for older people in community hospitals--a cost-effectiveness analysis within a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

机译:社区医院中老年人的急性后护理-多中心随机对照试验中的成本效益分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVES: to compare the cost effectiveness of post-acute care for older people provided in community hospitals with general hospital care. DESIGN: cost-effectiveness study embedded within a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: seven community hospitals and five general hospitals at five centres in the midlands and north of England. Participants: 490 patients needing rehabilitation following hospital admission with an acute illness. Intervention: multidisciplinary team care for older people in community hospitals. MEASUREMENTS: EuroQol EQ-5D scores transformed into quality-adjusted life years; health and social service costs during the 6-month period following randomisation. RESULTS: there was a non-significant difference between the community hospital and general hospital groups for changes in quality-adjusted life-year values from baseline to 6 months (mean difference 0.048; 95% confidence interval -0.028 to 0.123; P = 0.214). Resource use was similar for both groups. The mean (standard deviation)costs per patient for health and social services resources used were comparable for both groups: community hospital group 8,946 pounds ( 6,514 pounds); general hospital group 8,226 pounds ( 7,453 pounds). These findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimate was 16,324 pounds per quality-adjusted life year. A cost effectiveness acceptability curve suggests that if decision makers' willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year was 10,000 pounds, then community hospital care was effective in 47% of cases, and this increased to only 50% if the threshold willingness to pay was raised to 30,000 pounds. CONCLUSIONS: the cost effectiveness of post-acute rehabilitation for older people was similar in community hospitals and general hospitals.
机译:目的:比较社区医院与普通医院提供的老年人急性后护理的成本效益。设计:纳入随机对照试验的成本效益研究。地点:英格兰中部和北部五个中心的七个社区医院和五个综合医院。参与者:490名因急性疾病入院后需要康复的患者。干预:社区医院中针对老年人的多学科团队护理。测量:EuroQol EQ-5D分数转换为质量调整的生命年;随机分配后6个月内的健康和社会服务费用。结果:社区医院和普通医院组之间从基线到6个月的质量调整生命年值的变化无显着差异(平均差异0.048; 95%置信区间-0.028至0.123; P = 0.214) 。两组的资源使用情况相似。两组患者使用的健康和社会服务资源的平均费用(标准差)均相当:社区医院组8,946磅(6,514磅);综合医院组8,226磅(7,453磅)。这些发现对敏感性分析是有力的。成本效益比的增量估计为每个质量调整生命年16,324磅。成本效益可接受性曲线表明,如果决策者愿意为每项质量调整生命年支付的费用为10,000磅,那么47%的案例中社区医院护理有效,如果阈值支付意愿为,则这一数字仅增加到50%。加重到30,000磅结论:社区医院和综合医院老年人急性后康复的成本效益相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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