Abstract
Background
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.
Results
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
Conclusions
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.
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.
Results
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
Conclusions
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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1252-1261 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | European journal of preventive cardiology |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| Early online date | 1 Aug 2019 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 1 Aug 2019 |
Bibliographical note
© The Author(s) 2018Keywords
- Cardiac rehabilitation
- cost-effectiveness
- decision model
- health-related quality of life
- heart failure
- home-based
