Suzanne M Dyer1, Lachlan B Standfield2, Nicola Fairhall3, Ian D Cameron4, Meredith Gresham5,6, Henry Brodaty5,7, Maria Crotty1. 1. Rehabilitation, Aged and Extended Care, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2. Threshold Economics Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand. 3. Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4. John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Dementia Centre for Research Collaboration, School of Psychiatry, University of NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 6. The Dementia Centre, Hammond Care, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 7. Centre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To model the potential financial implications of Australian programs supporting cognitively impaired community-dwelling older people. METHODS: Markov cohort models of (a) an observational study of a residential dyadic training program for carers and people with dementia (GTSAH) and (b) a frailty intervention (FIT) in a cognitively impaired subgroup. Direct health and social welfare costs accrued over 5 years (2018 $AUD prices) were captured. GTSAH costs $3755, FIT costs $1834, and permanent residential aged care (P-RAC) costs $237 per day. RESULTS: Modelling predicted costs break even in approximately 5 months for GTSAH and 7 months for FIT, after which these interventions saved funds. The primary driver of savings was the P-RAC cost (discounted at 5%/annum), at $121 030 for GTSAH vs $231 193 for standard care; and $47 857 with FIT vs $111 359 for standard care. CONCLUSIONS: Programs supporting cognitively impaired community-dwelling older people could be financially beneficial; further evaluation and implementation would be a worthwhile investment.
OBJECTIVE: To model the potential financial implications of Australian programs supporting cognitively impaired community-dwelling older people. METHODS: Markov cohort models of (a) an observational study of a residential dyadic training program for carers and people with dementia (GTSAH) and (b) a frailty intervention (FIT) in a cognitively impaired subgroup. Direct health and social welfare costs accrued over 5 years (2018 $AUD prices) were captured. GTSAH costs $3755, FIT costs $1834, and permanent residential aged care (P-RAC) costs $237 per day. RESULTS: Modelling predicted costs break even in approximately 5 months for GTSAH and 7 months for FIT, after which these interventions saved funds. The primary driver of savings was the P-RAC cost (discounted at 5%/annum), at $121 030 for GTSAH vs $231 193 for standard care; and $47 857 with FIT vs $111 359 for standard care. CONCLUSIONS: Programs supporting cognitively impaired community-dwelling older people could be financially beneficial; further evaluation and implementation would be a worthwhile investment.
Authors: Alessandra Solari; Andrea Giordano; Francesco Patti; Maria Grazia Grasso; Paolo Confalonieri; Lucia Palmisano; Michela Ponzio; Claudia Borreani; Rosalba Rosato; Simone Veronese; Paola Zaratin; Mario Alberto Battaglia Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2017-04-06 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Raquel S D Betini; John P Hirdes; Donna S Lero; Susan Cadell; Jeff Poss; George Heckman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Nicola Fairhall; Catherine Sherrington; Susan E Kurrle; Stephen R Lord; Keri Lockwood; Ian D Cameron Journal: BMC Med Date: 2012-10-15 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Elizabeth G Birkenhäger-Gillesse; Wilco P Achterberg; Sarah I M Janus; Sytse U Zuidema; Wilbert B van den Hout Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2022-06-22
Authors: Suzanne M Dyer; Lachlan B Standfield; Nicola Fairhall; Ian D Cameron; Meredith Gresham; Henry Brodaty; Maria Crotty Journal: Australas J Ageing Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 2.111