Introduction The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization... Show moreIntroduction The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs. Materials and methods This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were euro3624 in the early mobilization group versus euro7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (euro1719 in the early mobilization group versus euro4589; p = 0.120). Conclusion From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost. Show less
Luenen, S. van; Kraaij, V.; Garnefski, N.; Spinhoven, P.; Akker-van Marie, M.E. van den 2019
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of a guided Internet-based intervention for people living with HIV and depressive symptoms, compared to attention only (control... Show moreObjective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of a guided Internet-based intervention for people living with HIV and depressive symptoms, compared to attention only (control condition). It was previously found that the intervention was effective in decreasing depressive symptoms, compared to the control group.Methods: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial. The control group received attention only and was put on a waiting list. Quality adjusted life years were calculated over six months. The study was conducted from a societal perspective and included intervention costs, healthcare costs, and non healthcare costs. Participants completed a pretest, a post-test after two to three months, and a second post-test after six months. Cost-utility acceptability curves were constructed and two sensitivity analyses were conducted.Results: No differences between the intervention and the control group were found in quality adjusted life years and total societal costs. The results indicate that the intervention is likely to be cost-effective, compared to attention only. The findings of the sensitivity analyses point in the same direction.Conclusion: More research with larger samples is necessary to confirm the findings. The outcomes of this study may inform policy makers to decide which interventions will be included in policies. The guided Internet intervention may improve psychological care for people living with HIV and depressive symptoms, against low costs. Show less
Boriani, G.; Mantovani, L.G.; Biffi, M.; Schalij, M.J.; Martignani, C.; Leclercq, C.; ... ; Auricchio, A. 2011
