Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Randomized trial of a brief physiotherapy intervention compared with usual physiotherapy for neck pain patients: cost-effectiveness analysis.
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Manca, Andrea Epstein, David M. Torgerson, David J. Moffett, Jennifer A. Klaber Coulton, Simon Farrin, Amanda J. Hahn, Seokyung Jackson, David A. Richmond, Stewart J. |
| Copyright Year | 2006 |
| Abstract | OBJECTIVES To assess the cost-effectiveness of brief physiotherapy intervention versus usual physiotherapy management in patients with neck pain of musculoskeletal origin in the community setting. METHODS A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled clinical trial. Individuals 18 years of age and older with neck pain of more than 2 weeks were recruited from physiotherapy departments with referrals from general practitioners (GPs) in the East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire regions in the United Kingdom. A total of 139 patients were allocated to the brief intervention, and 129 to the usual physiotherapy. Resource use data were prospectively collected on the number of physiotherapy sessions, hospital stay, specialist, and GP visits. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using EQ-5D data collected at baseline, 3 and 12 months from the start of the treatment. The economic evaluation was conducted from the U.K. National Health System perspective. RESULTS On average, brief intervention produced lower costs (pounds--68; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], pounds--103 to pounds--35) and marginally lower QALYs (-0.001; 95 percent CI, -0.030 to 0.028) compared with usual physiotherapy, resulting in an incremental cost per QALY of pounds 68,000 for usual physiotherapy. These results are sensitive to patients' treatment preferences. CONCLUSIONS Usual physiotherapy may not be good value for money for the average individual in this trial but could be a cost-effective strategy for those who are indifferent toward which treatment they receive. |
| Starting Page | 67 |
| Ending Page | 75 |
| Page Count | 9 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0266462306050859 |
| PubMed reference number | 16673682 |
| Journal | Medline |
| Volume Number | 22 |
| Issue Number | 1 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/crdweb/PrintPDF.php?AccessionNumber=22006008085&Copyright=NHS+Economic+Evaluation+Database+(NHS+EED)%3Cbr+/%3EProduced+by+the+Centre+for+Reviews+and+Dissemination+%3Cbr+/%3ECopyright+%26copy%3B+2020+University+of+York%3Cbr+/%3E |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462306050859 |
| Journal | International journal of technology assessment in health care |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
