| Literature DB >> 18294367 |
Narcís Gusi1, Pablo Tomas-Carus.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Physical therapy in warm water has been effective and highly recommended for persons with fibromyalgia, but its efficiency remains largely unknown. Should patients or health care managers invest in this therapy? The aim of the current study was to assess the cost-utility of adding an aquatic exercise programme to the usual care of women with fibromyalgia.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18294367 PMCID: PMC2374450 DOI: 10.1186/ar2377
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.156
Figure 1Flowchart outlining participation in the treatment.
Socio-demographic characteristics of females with fibromyalgia at baseline
| Exercise group | Control group | p Value | |
| Age (years)a | 50.7 (10.6) | 50.9 (6.7) | 0.935 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2)a | 28.8 (4.5) | 26.6 (3.5) | 0.147 |
| Duration of symptoms (years)a | 20.1 (8.0) | 19.4 (6.9) | 0.791 |
| Number of tender points (1 to 18 points)a | 16.9 (1.8) | 17.2 (1.3) | 0.563 |
| Number of specific drugs (anti depressives, muscular relaxants, analgesics)a | 1.3 (0.8) | 1.5 (0.8) | 0.379 |
| Employment status, n (%):b | 0.750 | ||
| Blue collar | 8 (53.3) | 6 (40.0) | |
| White collar | 2 (13.3) | 3 (20.0) | |
| Unemployed | 5 (33.3) | 6 (40.0) | |
| Education level, n:b | 0.184 | ||
| Unfinished studies | 1 (6.7) | 1 (6.7) | |
| Primary school | 9 (60.0) | 6 (40.0) | |
| Secondary school | 1 (6.7) | 6 (40.0) | |
| University degree | 4 (26.7) | 2 (13.3) |
aValues expressed as mean (SD), p values from analysis of variance (ANOVA); bp values from analysis of Chi-square.
Incremental cost of the exercise programme compared to usual care
| Concept | Unita | Over 8 months (€) | Total (€) |
| Health system costs: | |||
| Personnel:b | |||
| Sport technician | € 9/h | 1,092 | |
| Nurse | € 6.5/h | 788 | |
| Insurances and prevention | € 350 | 350 | |
| Facilities (renting pool and safeguards) | € 55/h | 5335 | |
| Management | € 24/month | 192 | |
| Medication (total health system perspective)c | Drug price | 0 | 7,757 |
| Additional societal costs: | |||
| Time spent in therapy | € 2.15/h | 3,135 | |
| Time spent in displacements and clothing | € 2.15/h | 3,135 | |
| Travel costs (bus tickets) | € 0.5/ticket | 1,455 | |
| Sub-total, societal additional costs | 7,725 | ||
| Total societal (additional costs and health system costs) | 15,482 |
aPublic cost in € in 2005; bsalary over 8 months = number of units × 13 h/month × 9.33 monthly salaries; cno relevant incremental costs between groups were found. The weekly cost of medication increased € 5.4 from baseline in each group.
Cost-utility analyses
| Alternatives | Usual care | Usual care plus exercise |
| EQ-5D utility at baselinea | 0.331 (0.150 to 0.511) | 0.316 (0.162 to 0.470) |
| EQ-5D utility at 3 monthsa | 0.334 (0.175 to 0.494) | 0.582 (0.434 to 0.729) |
| EQ-5D utility at 8 monthsa | 0.334 (0.175 to 0.493) | 0.528 (0.380 to 0.675) |
| QALY over 8 monthsb | 0.002 (-0.087 to 0.091) | 0.133 (0.034 to 0.231) |
| QALY difference vs. usual carec | 0.131 (0.011 to 0.290) | |
| Health system perspective: | ||
| Incremental cost/person (€) | 517 | |
| Cost-utility (€/QALY)c | 3,947 (1,782 to 47,000) | |
| Societal perspective: | ||
| Incremental cost/person (€) | 1,032 | |
| Cost-utility (€/QALY) ‡ | 7,878 (3,559 to 93,818) |
QALY, quality adjusted life year.
aMean (95% confidence interval) estimated by analysis of covariance with adjustment for baseline EQ-5D score and then rounded to 3 significant figures; bmean (95% confidence interval) using the area under the curve technique; cmean (95% confidence interval estimated by bootstrapping) using the area under the curve technique.
Figure 2Probability curves that the addition of the aquatic training to usual care is cost-effective.
Sensitivity analyses by treatment group
| Manipulation of variables | Incremental cost versus usual care per person (€) | Cost utility ratioa (€/QALY) |
| Health system analysis: | ||
| Number of participants per pool session: | ||
| 30% lower (10 patients/group) | 773 | 5,900 |
| 30% higher (20 patients/group) | 389 | 2,969 |
| Salary of personnel: | ||
| 30% lower (monitor and nurse) | 479 | 3,656 |
| 30% higher (monitor and nurse) | 554 | 4,229 |
| No additional salary of nurse | 465 | 3,550 |
| Best case scenario of salary, participation and effectivenessb | 348 | 1,200 |
| Worst case scenario of salary, participation and effectiveness | 830 | 75,455 |
| Societal analysis: | ||
| Number of participants per pool session: | ||
| 30% lower (10 patients/group) | 1,288 | 9,832 |
| 30% higher (20 patients/group) | 904 | 6,901 |
| Salary of personnel: | ||
| 30% lower (monitor and nurse) | 994 | 7,588 |
| 30% higher (monitor and nurse) | 1,069 | 8,160 |
| No additional salary of nurse | 980 | 7,481 |
| Distance to facilities per session: | ||
| Near (without bus ticket and 1.5 h spent) | 831 | 6,344 |
| Far (4 bus ticket and 2.5 h spent) | 1,442 | 11,008 |
| Best case scenario of salary, participation, effectiveness and nearb | 662 | 2,283 |
| Worst case scenario of salary, participation, effectiveness and farc | 1,755 | 159,545 |
QALY, quality adjusted life year.
aFrom the Spanish Health System, the cost-utility ratio threshold was set at € 23,153/QALY for 8 months in 2005; bpool rental + participation 20 persons per group + QALY differential at higher limit of 95% confidence interval; csalary 30% higher (monitor and nurse) + participation 10 persons per group + QALY differential at lower limit of 95% confidence interval.