Erik J Groessl1, Robert M Kaplan2, Cynthia M Castro Sweet3, Timothy Church4, Mark A Espeland5, Thomas M Gill6, Nancy W Glynn7, Abby C King8, Stephen Kritchevsky9, Todd Manini10, Mary M McDermott11, Kieran F Reid12, Julia Rushing5, Marco Pahor10. 1. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla. VA San Diego Healthcare System, California. egroessl@ucsd.edu. 2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland. 3. Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, California. 4. Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University System, Baton Rouge. 5. Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 8. Department of Health Research & Policy and Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, California. 9. Sticht Center on Aging, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 10. Department of Aging and Geriatric Research, University of Florida, Gainesville. 11. Department of Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 12. Nutrition, Exercise Physiology and Sarcopenia Laboratory, Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Losing the ability to walk safely and independently is a major concern for many older adults. The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders study recently demonstrated that a physical activity (PA) intervention can delay the onset of major mobility disability. Our objective is to examine the resources required to deliver the PA intervention and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness compared with a health education intervention. METHODS: The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders study enrolled 1,635 older adults at risk for mobility disability. They were recruited at eight field centers and randomly assigned to either PA or health education. The PA program consisted of 50-minute center-based exercise 2× weekly, augmented with home-based activity to achieve a goal of 150 min/wk of PA. Health education consisted of weekly workshops for 26 weeks, and monthly sessions thereafter. Analyses were conducted from a health system perspective, with a 2.6-year time horizon. RESULTS: The average cost per participant over 2.6 years was US$3,302 and US$1,001 for the PA and health education interventions, respectively. PA participants accrued 0.047 per person more Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) than health education participants. PA interventions costs were slightly higher than other recent PA interventions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were US$42,376/major mobility disability prevented and US$49,167/QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were relatively robust to varied assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: The PA intervention costs and QALYs gained are comparable to those found in other studies. The ICERS are less than many commonly recommended medical treatments. Implementing the intervention in non-research settings may reduce costs further.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Losing the ability to walk safely and independently is a major concern for many older adults. The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders study recently demonstrated that a physical activity (PA) intervention can delay the onset of major mobility disability. Our objective is to examine the resources required to deliver the PA intervention and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness compared with a health education intervention. METHODS: The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders study enrolled 1,635 older adults at risk for mobility disability. They were recruited at eight field centers and randomly assigned to either PA or health education. The PA program consisted of 50-minute center-based exercise 2× weekly, augmented with home-based activity to achieve a goal of 150 min/wk of PA. Health education consisted of weekly workshops for 26 weeks, and monthly sessions thereafter. Analyses were conducted from a health system perspective, with a 2.6-year time horizon. RESULTS: The average cost per participant over 2.6 years was US$3,302 and US$1,001 for the PA and health education interventions, respectively. PA participants accrued 0.047 per person more Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) than health education participants. PA interventions costs were slightly higher than other recent PA interventions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were US$42,376/major mobility disability prevented and US$49,167/QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were relatively robust to varied assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: The PA intervention costs and QALYs gained are comparable to those found in other studies. The ICERS are less than many commonly recommended medical treatments. Implementing the intervention in non-research settings may reduce costs further.
Authors: W Jack Rejeski; Roger A Fielding; Steven N Blair; Jack M Guralnik; Thomas M Gill; Evan C Hadley; Abby C King; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Michael E Miller; Anne B Newman; Marco Pahor Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: J M Guralnik; A Z LaCroix; R D Abbott; L F Berkman; S Satterfield; D A Evans; R B Wallace Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1993-04-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Anthony P Marsh; Laura C Lovato; Nancy W Glynn; Kimberly Kennedy; Cynthia Castro; Kathryn Domanchuk; Erica McDavitt; Ruben Rodate; Michael Marsiske; Joanne McGloin; Erik J Groessl; Marco Pahor; Jack M Guralnik Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Roger A Fielding; W Jack Rejeski; Steven Blair; Tim Church; Mark A Espeland; Thomas M Gill; Jack M Guralnik; Fang-Chi Hsu; Jeffrey Katula; Abby C King; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Mary M McDermott; Michael E Miller; Susan Nayfield; Anne B Newman; Jeff D Williamson; Denise Bonds; Sergei Romashkan; Evan Hadley; Marco Pahor Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2011-08-08 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Erik J Groessl; Robert M Kaplan; W Jack Rejeski; Jeffrey A Katula; Nancy W Glynn; Abby C King; Stephen D Anton; Michael Walkup; Ching-Ju Lu; Kieran Reid; Bonnie Spring; Marco Pahor Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Joshua D Brown; Ching-Yu Wang; Erik J Groessl; Marco Pahor; Todd M Manini Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Monty Montano; Shalender Bhasin; Richard T D'Aquila; Kristine M Erlandson; William J Evans; Nicholas T Funderburg; Amy Justice; Lishomwa C Ndhlovu; Bisola Ojikutu; Marco Pahor; Savita Pahwa; Alice S Ryan; Jennifer Schrack; Michael B Schultz; Paola Sebastiani; David A Sinclair; Julia Tripp; Bruce Walker; Julie A Womack; Raymond Yung; R Keith Reeves Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2019-09-23 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Duc Ha; Jacqueline Kerr; Andrew L Ries; Mark M Fuster; Scott M Lippman; James D Murphy Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Patrick T Donahue; George Grove; Chelsea Stillman; Chaeryon Kang; Jeffrey Burns; Charles H Hillman; Arthur F Kramer; Edward McAuley; Eric Vidoni; Kirk I Erickson Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2021-04-18 Impact factor: 2.261
Authors: Thomas M Gill; Marco Pahor; Jack M Guralnik; Mary M McDermott; Abby C King; Thomas W Buford; Elsa S Strotmeyer; Miriam E Nelson; Kaycee M Sink; Jamehl L Demons; Susan S Kashaf; Michael P Walkup; Michael E Miller Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-02-03
Authors: D M Mijnarends; Y C Luiking; R J G Halfens; S M A A Evers; E L A Lenaerts; S Verlaan; M Wallace; J M G A Schols; J M M Meijers Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2018 Impact factor: 4.075