IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v92y2024ics0038012124000363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of a medication review intervention for general practitioners and their multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy

Author

Listed:
  • Jungo, Katharina Tabea
  • Salari, Paola
  • Meier, Rahel
  • Bagattini, Michael
  • Spruit, Marco
  • Rodondi, Nicolas
  • Streit, Sven
  • Schwenkglenks, Matthias

Abstract

Older adults with multiple chronic conditions and polypharmacy are at an increased risk of having adverse health outcomes, affecting quality of life and generating costs. Primary care has to be effective to guarantee excellent treatment to these patients, who are among the most vulnerable. This project aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of a tool aimed at improving general practitioners' (GPs) performance, namely a medication review intervention centered around an electronic clinical decision support system (eCDSS). We performed a pre-planned within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of the OPTICA trial, a cluster randomized controlled trial in Swiss primary care practices aimed at optimizing medication appropriateness and reducing prescribing omissions. Trial participants were older adults aged ≥65 years with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 medications. The 160 participants in the intervention group received a medication review intervention centered around an eCDSS provided by their GP and followed by shared decision-making with their GP. The 163 participants in the control group had a medication discussion in line with usual care with their GP. Patients were followed-up for 12 months. Considering the clustered structure of the data at GP practice level, we applied Generalized Structural Equation Models (GSEMs) on a multiple imputed sample to estimate intervention effects on costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The intervention strategy was dominant with cost-savings of CHF 1′857 (95 % confidence interval (CI): CHF -3′620 to −93, p-value <0.039, with CHF 1≅USD 1.11 as of November 2023) and a gain of 0.026 incremental QALYs (95 % CI: 0.013 to 0.040, p-value <0.001) per study participant. In robustness analyses, directions of effects were fully consistent, albeit some effect estimates non-significant. Subgroup analyses suggested stronger effects in men and older adults aged 65–74 years or aged ≥85 years. The medication review intervention led to cost savings and an improvement in quality of life, potentially resulting from an accumulation of multiple small positive intervention effects, such as fewer hospitalizations and nursing visits at home.

Suggested Citation

  • Jungo, Katharina Tabea & Salari, Paola & Meier, Rahel & Bagattini, Michael & Spruit, Marco & Rodondi, Nicolas & Streit, Sven & Schwenkglenks, Matthias, 2024. "Cost-effectiveness of a medication review intervention for general practitioners and their multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:92:y:2024:i:c:s0038012124000363
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2024.101837
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012124000363
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2024.101837?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:92:y:2024:i:c:s0038012124000363. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/seps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.