IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0184328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aerobic exercise for vasomotor menopausal symptoms: A cost-utility analysis based on the Active Women trial

Author

Listed:
  • Ilias Goranitis
  • Leana Bellanca
  • Amanda J Daley
  • Adele Thomas
  • Helen Stokes-Lampard
  • Andrea K Roalfe
  • Sue Jowett

Abstract

Objective: To compare the cost-utility of two exercise interventions relative to a control group for vasomotor menopausal symptoms. Design: Economic evaluation taking a UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective and a societal perspective. Setting: Primary care. Population: Peri- and postmenopausal women who have not used hormone therapy in the past 3 months and experience ≥ 5 episodes of vasomotor symptoms daily. Methods: An individual and a social support-based exercise intervention were evaluated. The former (Exercise-DVD), aimed to prompt exercise with purpose-designed DVD and written materials, whereas the latter (Exercise-Social support) with community exercise social support groups. Costs and outcomes associated with these interventions were compared to those of a control group, who could only have an exercise consultation. An incremental cost-utility analysis was undertaken using bootstrapping to account for the uncertainty around cost-effectiveness point-estimates. Main outcome measure: Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Results: Data for 261 women were available for analysis. Exercise-DVD was the most expensive and least effective intervention. Exercise-Social support was £52 (CIs: £18 to £86) and £18 (CIs: -£68 to £105) more expensive per woman than the control group at 6 and 12 months post-randomisation and led to 0.006 (CIs: -0.002 to 0.014) and 0.013 (CIs: -0.01 to 0.036) more QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £8,940 and £1,413 per QALY gained respectively. Exercise-Social support had 80%-90% probability of being cost-effective in the UK context. A societal perspective of analysis and a complete-case analysis led to similar findings. Conclusions: Exercise-Social support resulted in a small gain in health-related quality of life at a marginal additional cost in a context where broader wellbeing and long-term gains associated with exercise and social participation were not captured. Community exercise social support groups are very likely to be cost-effective in the management of vasomotor menopausal symptoms.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilias Goranitis & Leana Bellanca & Amanda J Daley & Adele Thomas & Helen Stokes-Lampard & Andrea K Roalfe & Sue Jowett, 2017. "Aerobic exercise for vasomotor menopausal symptoms: A cost-utility analysis based on the Active Women trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0184328
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0184328
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0184328&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0184328?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glick, Henry A. & Doshi, Jalpa A. & Sonnad, Seema S. & Polsky, Daniel, 2014. "Economic Evaluation in Clinical Trials," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199685028.
    2. Marieke Krol & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "How to Estimate Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 335-344, April.
    3. Gerald Richardson & Andrea Manca, 2004. "Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(12), pages 1203-1210, December.
    4. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453.
    5. Päivi Kolu & Jani Raitanen & Clas-Håkan Nygård & Eija Tomás & Riitta Luoto, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness of Physical Activity among Women with Menopause Symptoms: Findings from a Randomised Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Rita Faria & Manuel Gomes & David Epstein & Ian White, 2014. "A Guide to Handling Missing Data in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Conducted Within Randomised Controlled Trials," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(12), pages 1157-1170, December.
    7. Andrea Marshall & Lucinda Billingham & Stirling Bryan, 2009. "Can we afford to ignore missing data in cost-effectiveness analyses?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(1), pages 1-3, February.
    8. Koopmanschap, Marc A. & Rutten, Frans F. H. & van Ineveld, B. Martin & van Roijen, Leona, 1995. "The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 171-189, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonas Steel & Lode Godderis & Jeroen Luyten, 2018. "Methodological Challenges in the Economic Evaluation of Occupational Health and Safety Programmes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Rachael Hunter & Gianluca Baio & Thomas Butt & Stephen Morris & Jeff Round & Nick Freemantle, 2015. "An Educational Review of the Statistical Issues in Analysing Utility Data for Cost-Utility Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 355-366, April.
    3. NamKwen Kim & Kyung-Min Shin & Eun-Sung Seo & Minjung Park & Hye-Yoon Lee, 2020. "Electroacupuncture with Usual Care for Patients with Non-Acute Pain after Back Surgery: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Andronis, Lazaros & Maredza, Mandy & Petrou, Stavros, 2019. "Measuring, valuing and including forgone childhood education and leisure time costs in economic evaluation: Methods, challenges and the way forward," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Sun Sun & Nan Luo & Erik Stenberg & Lars Lindholm & Klas-Göran Sahlén & Karl A. Franklin & Yang Cao, 2022. "Sequential Multiple Imputation for Real-World Health-Related Quality of Life Missing Data after Bariatric Surgery," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Hanly, Paul & Ortega Ortega, Marta & Pearce, Alison & Soerjomataram, Isabelle & Sharp, Linda, 2020. "Advances in the methodological approach to friction period estimation: A European perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    7. Werner Brouwer & Samare Huls & Ayesha Sajjad & Tim Kanters & Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen & Job Exel, 2022. "In Absence of Absenteeism: Some Thoughts on Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations in a Post-corona Era," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 7-11, January.
    8. Paul Hanly & Rebecca Maguire & Frances Drummond & Linda Sharp, 2019. "Variation in the methodological approach to productivity cost valuation: the case of prostate cancer," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(9), pages 1399-1408, December.
    9. Ina Rissanen & Leena Ala-Mursula & Iiro Nerg & Marko Korhonen, 2021. "Adjusted productivity costs of stroke by human capital and friction cost methods: a Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(4), pages 531-545, June.
    10. Zhang, Wei & Bansback, Nick & Anis, Aslam H., 2011. "Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: A critical review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 185-192, January.
    11. Baptiste Leurent & Manuel Gomes & James R. Carpenter, 2018. "Missing data in trial‐based cost‐effectiveness analysis: An incomplete journey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(6), pages 1024-1040, June.
    12. Mennini, Francesco Saverio & Gitto, Lara, 2022. "Approaches to Estimating Indirect Costs in Healthcare: Motivations for Choice," MPRA Paper 112129, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Matthew Franklin & James Lomas & Simon Walker & Tracey Young, 2019. "An Educational Review About Using Cost Data for the Purpose of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 631-643, May.
    14. Ângela Jornada Ben & Johanna M. Dongen & Mohamed El Alili & Martijn W. Heymans & Jos W. R. Twisk & Janet L. MacNeil-Vroomen & Maartje Wit & Susan E. M. Dijk & Teddy Oosterhuis & Judith E. Bosmans, 2023. "The handling of missing data in trial-based economic evaluations: should data be multiply imputed prior to longitudinal linear mixed-model analyses?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(6), pages 951-965, August.
    15. Silke B. Wolfenstetter & Christina M. Wenig, 2010. "Economic Evaluation and Transferability of Physical Activity Programmes in Primary Prevention: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-27, April.
    16. Marieke Krol & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "How to Estimate Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 335-344, April.
    17. Hansen, Kristian S. & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars P., 2023. "Productivity and quality-adjusted life years: QALYs, PALYs and beyond," Working Papers 11-2023, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    18. Hassan Serrier & Hélène Sultan-Taieb & Danièle Luce & Sophie Bejean, 2014. "Estimating the social cost of respiratory cancer cases attributable to occupational exposures in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(6), pages 661-673, July.
    19. Nadia Yakhelef & Martine Audibert & Bruno Peirera & Antoine Mons & Emmanuel Chabert, 2015. "Cost-utility Analysis of Vertebroplasty versus Thoracolumbosacral Orthosis in the Treatment of Traumatic Vertebral Fractures," CERDI Working papers halshs-01241824, HAL.
    20. Krol, Marieke & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Severens, Johan L. & Kaper, Janneke & Evers, Silvia M.A.A., 2012. "Productivity cost calculations in health economic evaluations: Correcting for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(11), pages 1981-1988.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0184328. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.