IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0267247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the cost-effectiveness of the Otago Exercise Programme among older women and men: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer C Davis
  • Chun Liang Hsu
  • Cindy Barha
  • Deborah A Jehu
  • Patrick Chan
  • Cheyenne Ghag
  • Patrizio Jacova
  • Cassandra Adjetey
  • Larry Dian
  • Naaz Parmar
  • Kenneth Madden
  • Teresa Liu-Ambrose

Abstract

Objective: Using stratified analyses, we examined the cost-effectiveness of the Otago Exercise Programme (OEP), from a health care system perspective, among older women and men who have previously fallen. Methods: This study was a secondary stratified analysis (by women and men), of a 12-month prospective economic evaluation of a randomized clinical trial (OEP compared with usual care). Three hundred and forty four community-dwelling older adults (≥70; 172 OEP (110 women; 62 men), 172 usual care (119 women; 53 men)) who sustained a fall in the past 12 months and received a baseline assessment at the Vancouver Falls Prevention Clinic, Canada were included. A gender by OEP/usual care interaction was examined for the falls incidence rate ratio (IRR). Outcome measures stratified by gender included: falls IRR, incremental cost-per fall prevented (ICER), incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY, ICUR) gained, and mean total health care resource utilization costs. Results: Men were frailer than women at baseline. Men incurred higher mean total healthcare costs $6794 (SD: $11906)). There was no significant gender by OEP/usual care interaction on falls IRR. The efficacy of the OEP did not vary by gender. The adjusted IRR for the OEP group demonstrated a 39% (IRR: 0.61, CI: 0.40–0.93) significant reduction in falls among men but not women (32% reduction (IRR: 0.69, CI: 0.47–1.02)). The ICER showed the OEP was effective in preventing falls and less costly for men, while it was costlier for women by $42. The ICUR showed the OEP did not impact quality of life. Conclusion: Future studies should explore gender factors (i.e., health seeking behaviours, gender related frailty) that may explain observed variation in the cost-effectiveness of the OEP as a secondary falls prevention strategy. Trial registrations: ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer C Davis & Chun Liang Hsu & Cindy Barha & Deborah A Jehu & Patrick Chan & Cheyenne Ghag & Patrizio Jacova & Cassandra Adjetey & Larry Dian & Naaz Parmar & Kenneth Madden & Teresa Liu-Ambrose, 2022. "Comparing the cost-effectiveness of the Otago Exercise Programme among older women and men: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-14, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267247
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267247
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267247&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0267247?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. Brazier, John & Roberts, Jennifer & Deverill, Mark, 2002. "The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 271-292, March.
    2. John M. Miyamoto & Stephen A. Eraker, 1985. "Parameter Estimates for a QALY Utility Model," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 5(2), pages 191-213, 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. Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Niakas, Dimitris, 2008. "An estimate of lifelong costs and QALYs in renal replacement therapy based on patients' life expectancy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 85-96, April.
    2. Samer A. Kharroubi & Yara Beyh & Marwa Diab El Harake & Dalia Dawoud & Donna Rowen & John Brazier, 2020. "Examining the Feasibility and Acceptability of Valuing the Arabic Version of SF-6D in a Lebanese Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.
    3. Nick Bansback & Huiying Sun & Daphne P. Guh & Xin Li & Bohdan Nosyk & Susan Griffin & Paul G. Barnett & Aslam H. Anis, 2008. "Impact of the recall period on measuring health utilities for acute events," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1413-1419.
    4. Clarke, Philip & Erreygers, Guido, 2020. "Defining and measuring health poverty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    5. Ryan Edwards, 2013. "The cost of uncertain life span," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1485-1522, October.
    6. Francesca Cornaglia & Naomi E. Feldman & Andrew Leigh, 2014. "Crime and Mental Well-Being," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(1), pages 110-140.
    7. Ratcliffe, Julie & Huynh, Elisabeth & Chen, Gang & Stevens, Katherine & Swait, Joffre & Brazier, John & Sawyer, Michael & Roberts, Rachel & Flynn, Terry, 2016. "Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D: Using profile case best worst scaling methods to develop a new adolescent specific scoring algorithm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 48-59.
    8. Stavros Petrou & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Helen Dakin & Louise Longworth & Mark Oppe & Robert Froud & Alastair Gray, 2015. "Preferred Reporting Items for Studies Mapping onto Preference-Based Outcome Measures: The MAPS Statement," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(6), pages 1-8, August.
    9. Anirban Basu & William Dale & Arthur Elstein & David Meltzer, 2009. "A linear index for predicting joint health‐states utilities from single health‐states utilities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 403-419, April.
    10. McCabe, Christopher & Brazier, John & Gilks, Peter & Tsuchiya, Aki & Roberts, Jennifer & O'Hagan, Anthony & Stevens, Katherine, 2006. "Using rank data to estimate health state utility models," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 418-431, May.
    11. Thomas Reinhold & Claudia Witt & Susanne Jena & Benno Brinkhaus & Stefan Willich, 2008. "Quality of life and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture treatment in patients with osteoarthritis pain," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(3), pages 209-219, August.
    12. Allanson, Paul, 2017. "Monitoring income-related health differences between regions in Great Britain: A new measure for ordinal health data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 72-80.
    13. Andrew M. Jones & Audrey Laporte & Nigel Rice & Eugenio Zucchelli, 2019. "Dynamic panel data estimation of an integrated Grossman and Becker–Murphy model of health and addiction," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 703-733, February.
    14. Makai, Peter & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Koopmanschap, Marc A. & Stolk, Elly A. & Nieboer, Anna P., 2014. "Quality of life instruments for economic evaluations in health and social care for older people: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 83-93.
    15. Stevens, K, 2010. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility Index 9D (CHU9D)," MPRA Paper 29938, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Brazier, JE & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," MPRA Paper 29808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Johanna L. Bosch & Elkan F. Halpern & G. Scott Gazelle, 2002. "Comparison of Preference-Based Utilities of the Short-Form 36 Health Survey and Health Utilities Index before and after Treatment of Patients with Intermittent Claudication," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(5), pages 403-409, October.
    18. Christopher McCabe & Katherine Stevens & Jennifer Roberts & John Brazier, 2005. "Health state values for the HUI 2 descriptive system: results from a UK survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 231-244, March.
    19. Kvamme, Maria Knoph & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte & Olsen, Jan Abel & Kristiansen, Ivar Sønbø, 2010. "Increasing marginal utility of small increases in life-expectancy?: Results from a population survey," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 541-548, July.
    20. Swee Soon & Su Goh & Yong Bee & Jiat Poon & Shu Li & Julian Thumboo & Hwee Wee, 2010. "Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL) [Chinese version for Singapore] questionnaire," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 239-249, July.

    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:pone00:0267247. 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.