Literature DB >> 23521855

Approaches to economic evaluations of stroke rehabilitation.

Louise E Craig1, Olivia Wu, Julie Bernhardt, Peter Langhorne.   

Abstract

Many stroke rehabilitation services and interventions are complex in that they involve a number of components, interactions, and outcomes. Much of the onus of stroke care lies with rehabilitation services and because stroke rehabilitation is highly resource intensive, it is important for policy makers to consider the potential trade-offs between all relevant costs and benefits. The primary aim of this systematic review was to assess the methods used to conduct economic evaluations of stroke rehabilitation. Studies that compared two or more alternative stroke rehabilitation interventions or services with the costs and outcomes being examined for each alternative were included. EMBASE, MEDLINE In-Process, and National Health Service's Economic Evaluation Database were searched using search strategies. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised using a checklist for the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations. Twenty-one studies met the selection criteria. The economic evaluations in the majority of these studies were inadequate based on their ability to identify, measure, and value all resources and benefits pertinent to the complexity of stroke rehabilitation. This study highlights that complex interventions such as stroke rehabilitation have widespread effects, which may not be represented by the changes on a single outcome. This study recommends the adoption of a wider cost and benefit perspective in the economic evaluations of complex interventions. It supports a move away from conventional economic evaluation and decision making, based purely on cost-effectiveness, toward multicriteria decision analysis frameworks for complex interventions, where a broader range of criteria may be assessed by policy makers.
© 2013 The Authors. International Journal of Stroke © 2013 World Stroke Organization.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute; cost factors; economics; methodology; rehabilitation; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23521855     DOI: 10.1111/ijs.12041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Stroke        ISSN: 1747-4930            Impact factor:   5.266


  11 in total

1.  Improving economic evaluations in stroke: A report from the ESO Health Economics Working Group.

Authors:  Dominique A Cadilhac; Joosup Kim; Alastair Wilson; Eivind Berge; Anita Patel; Myzoon Ali; Jeffrey Saver; Hanne Christensen; Matthieu Cuche; Sean Crews; Olivia Wu; Marine Provoyeur; Peter McMeekin; Isabelle Durand-Zaleski; Gary A Ford; Natalia Muhlemann; Philip M Bath; Azmil H Abdul-Rahim; Katharina Sunnerhagen; Atte Meretoja; Vincent Thijs; Christian Weimar; Ayrton Massaro; Annemarei Ranta; Kennedy R Lees
Journal:  Eur Stroke J       Date:  2020-01-27

2.  Cost-Effectiveness of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Implementation in Neurorehabilitation: The ACTIveARM Project.

Authors:  Lauren J Christie; Nicola Fearn; Annie McCluskey; Meryl Lovarini; Reem Rendell; Alison Pearce
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2022-03-22

3.  Usual Clinical Practice for Early Supported Discharge after Stroke with Continued Rehabilitation at Home: An Observational Comparative Study.

Authors:  Malin Tistad; Lena von Koch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Community-based rehabilitation training after stroke: results of a pilot randomised controlled trial (ReTrain) investigating acceptability and feasibility.

Authors:  Sarah G Dean; Leon Poltawski; Anne Forster; Rod S Taylor; Anne Spencer; Martin James; Rhoda Allison; Shirley Stevens; Meriel Norris; Anthony I Shepherd; Paolo Landa; Richard M Pulsford; Laura Hollands; Raff Calitri
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Economic evaluation of a phase III international randomised controlled trial of very early mobilisation after stroke (AVERT).

Authors:  Lan Gao; Lauren Sheppard; Olivia Wu; Leonid Churilov; Mohammadreza Mohebbi; Janice Collier; Julie Bernhardt; Fiona Ellery; Helen Dewey; Marj Moodie
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Singing for people with aphasia (SPA): results of a pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of a group singing intervention investigating acceptability and feasibility.

Authors:  Mark Tarrant; Mary Carter; Sarah Gerard Dean; Rod Taylor; Fiona C Warren; Anne Spencer; Jane Adamson; Paolo Landa; Chris Code; Amy Backhouse; Ruth A Lamont; Raff Calitri
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Development of strategies to support home-based exercise adherence after stroke: a Delphi consensus.

Authors:  Amreen Mahmood; Anagha Deshmukh; Manikandan Natarajan; Dianne Marsden; Glade Vyslysel; Sebastian Padickaparambil; Shwetha Ts; Artur Direito; Senthil Kumaran; Girish N; Harpreet Sachdev; Sundar Kumar Veluswamy; Suruliraj Karthikbabu; B Unnikrishnan; Coralie English; John M Solomon
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of a bundled intervention to enhance outcomes after stroke in Nigeria: Rationale and design.

Authors:  Olanrewaju Olaniyan; Mayowa O Owolabi; Rufus O Akinyemi; Babatunde L Salako; Samantha Hurst; Oyedunni Arulogun; Mulugeta Gebregziabher; Ezinne Uvere; Bruce Ovbiagele
Journal:  eNeurologicalSci       Date:  2015-06

9.  Community-based Rehabilitation Training after stroke: protocol of a pilot randomised controlled trial (ReTrain).

Authors:  Sarah G Dean; Leon Poltawski; Anne Forster; Rod S Taylor; Anne Spencer; Martin James; Rhoda Allison; Shirley Stevens; Meriel Norris; Anthony I Shepherd; Raff Calitri
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Singing for people with aphasia (SPA): a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of a group singing intervention to improve well-being.

Authors:  Mark Tarrant; Mary Carter; Sarah Gerard Dean; Rod S Taylor; Fiona C Warren; Anne Spencer; Jane Adamson; Paolo Landa; Chris Code; Raff Calitri
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.