The cost effectiveness of REACH-HF and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a decision model-based analysis

Rod S Taylor, Susannah Sadler, Hasnain M. Dalai, Fiona Warren, Kate Jolly, Russell C Davis, Patrick Joseph Doherty, Jackie Miles, Colin Greaves, Jennifer Wingham, Melvyn Hillsdon, Charles Abraham, Julia Frost, Sally Singh, Christopher Hayward, Victoria Eyre, Kevin Paul, Chim C Lang, Karen Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


The REACH-HF (Rehabilitation EnAblement in CHronic Heart Failure) trial found that the REACH-HF home-based intervention resulted in a clinically meaningful
improvement in disease-specific health-related quality of life in patients with reduced ejection fraction heart failure (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to assess the longterm cost-effectiveness of the addition of REACH-HF intervention or home-based CR to usual care compared to usual care alone in patients with HFrEF.

Design and methods
A Markov model was developed using a patient lifetime horizon and integrating
evidence from the REACH-HF trial, a systematic review/meta-analysis of randomised trials, estimates of mortality and hospital admission and UK costs at 2015/6 prices.

Taking a UK National Health and Personal Social Services perspective we report the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, assessing uncertainty using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

In base case analysis, the REACH-HF intervention was associated with per patient
mean QALY gain of 0.30 and an increased mean cost of £126 compared with usual care, resulting in a cost per QALY of £415. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 77% probability that REACH-HF is cost effective versus usual care at a threshold of

£20,000 per QALY. Results were similar for home-based CR versus usual care.
Sensitivity analyses indicate the findings to be robust to changes in model assumptions and parameters

Our analyses indicate that the addition of the REACH-HF intervention and home-based CR programmes are likely to be cost-effective treatment options versus usual care alone in patients with HFrEF.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1252-1261
Number of pages10
JournalEuropean journal of preventive cardiology
Issue number12
Early online date1 Aug 2019
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 1 Aug 2019

Bibliographical note

© The Author(s) 2018


  • Cardiac rehabilitation
  • cost-effectiveness
  • decision model
  • health-related quality of life
  • heart failure
  • home-based

Cite this