C Anderson1, C N Mhurchu, S Rubenach, M Clark, C Spencer, A Winsor. 1. Rehabilitation & Ageing Studies Unit, Department of Medicine, Flinders University of South Australia, Daw Park, South Australia. c.anderson@ctru.auckland.ac.nz
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The goal of the present study was to examine the resource and economic implications of an early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation scheme for patients with acute stroke. METHODS: A cost minimization analysis in conjunction with a randomized controlled trial was carried out at 2 affiliated teaching hospitals in the southern metropolitan region of Adelaide, South Australia, between 1997 and 1998. Eighty-six hospitalizedpatients with acute stroke who required rehabilitation were randomized to receive both early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation, or conventional in-hospital rehabilitation and community care. Direct and indirect costs related to stroke rehabilitation were calculated, including hospital bed days, home-based intervention program, community services, and personal expenses during the 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: The mean cost per patient was lower for patients randomized to the early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation ($8040) compared with those who received conventional care ($10 054). This cost saving was not statistically significant (P=0.14). However, sensitivity analyses indicated that the cost of home-based rehabilitation was consistently lower than that of conventional care except when hospital costs were assumed to be 50% less than those used in the main analysis. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the cost of the home-based program was significantly related to a patient's level of disability after adjustment for age, comorbidity, and the presence or absence of a caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: The early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation scheme was less costly than conventional hospital care for patients with stroke. Limitation of the provision of such services to patients with mild disability is likely to be most cost effective.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The goal of the present study was to examine the resource and economic implications of an early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation scheme for patients with acute stroke. METHODS: A cost minimization analysis in conjunction with a randomized controlled trial was carried out at 2 affiliated teaching hospitals in the southern metropolitan region of Adelaide, South Australia, between 1997 and 1998. Eighty-six hospitalized patients with acute stroke who required rehabilitation were randomized to receive both early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation, or conventional in-hospital rehabilitation and community care. Direct and indirect costs related to stroke rehabilitation were calculated, including hospital bed days, home-based intervention program, community services, and personal expenses during the 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: The mean cost per patient was lower for patients randomized to the early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation ($8040) compared with those who received conventional care ($10 054). This cost saving was not statistically significant (P=0.14). However, sensitivity analyses indicated that the cost of home-based rehabilitation was consistently lower than that of conventional care except when hospital costs were assumed to be 50% less than those used in the main analysis. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the cost of the home-based program was significantly related to a patient's level of disability after adjustment for age, comorbidity, and the presence or absence of a caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: The early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation scheme was less costly than conventional hospital care for patients with stroke. Limitation of the provision of such services to patients with mild disability is likely to be most cost effective.
Authors: Vicki A Freedman; Jeannette Rogowski; Steven L Wickstrom; John Adams; Jonas Marainen; José J Escarce Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.402