Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
BackgroundA recent HTA review concluded that there was a need for RCTs of exercise referral schemes (ERS) for people with a medical diagnosis who might benefit from exercise. Overall, there is still uncertainty as to the cost-effectiveness of ERS. Evaluation of public health interventions places challenges on conventional health economics approaches. This economic evaluation of a national public health intervention addresses this issue of where ERS may be most cost effective through subgroup analysis, particularly important at a time of financial constraint.MethodThis economic analysis included 798 individuals aged 16 and over (55% of the randomised controlled trial (RCT) sample) with coronary heart disease risk factors and/or mild to moderate anxiety, depression or stress. Individuals were referred by health professionals in a primary care setting to a 16 week national exercise referral scheme (NERS) delivered by qualified exercise professionals in local leisure centres in Wales, UK. Health-related quality of life, health care services use, costs per participant in NERS, and willingness to pay for NERS were measured at 6 and 12 months.ResultsThe base case analysis assumed a participation cost of £385 per person per year, with a mean difference in QALYs between the two groups of 0.027. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £12,111 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated an 89% probability of NERS being cost-effective at a payer threshold of £30,000 per QALY. When participant payments of £1 and £2 per session were considered, the cost per QALY fell from £12,111 (base case) to £10,926 and £9,741, respectively. Participants with a mental health risk factor alone or in combination with a risk of chronic heart disease generated a lower ICER (£10,276) compared to participants at risk of chronic heart disease only (£13,060).ConclusionsResults of cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that NERS is cost saving in fully adherent participants. Though full adherence to NERS (62%) was higher for the economics sample than the main sample (44%), results still suggest that NERS can be cost-effective in Wales with respect to existing payer thresholds particularly for participants with mental health and CHD risk factors.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN47680448
Highlights
A recent HTA review concluded that there was a need for RCTs of exercise referral schemes (ERS) for people with a medical diagnosis who might benefit from exercise
Results of cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that national exercise referral scheme (NERS) is cost saving in fully adherent participants
Though full adherence to NERS (62%) was higher for the economics sample than the main sample (44%), results still suggest that NERS can be cost-effective in Wales with respect to existing payer thresholds for participants with mental health and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors
Summary
A recent HTA review concluded that there was a need for RCTs of exercise referral schemes (ERS) for people with a medical diagnosis who might benefit from exercise. Evaluation of public health interventions places challenges on conventional health economics approaches This economic evaluation of a national public health intervention addresses this issue of where ERS may be most cost effective through subgroup analysis, important at a time of financial constraint. Matrix (2006), [7] reviewed the literature and modelled the cost-effectiveness of four interventions, pedometers, exercise referral, walking and cycling programmes in the community. In Australia, Cobiac et al (2009), [6] modelled disability adjusted life years (DALYs) gained from six population level exercise promotion interventions. They found that pedometer use, mass media-based community campaigns, GP exercise referral, healthy transport and internet programmes were within the AUS $50,000 threshold
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
