English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective  To compare the cost-utility of two exercise interventions relative to a control group for vasomotor menopausal symptoms.    Design  Economic evaluation taking a UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective and a societal perspective.    Setting  Primary care.    Population  Peri- and postmenopausal women who have not used hormone therapy in the past 3 months and experience ≥ 5 episodes of vasomotor symptoms daily.    Methods  An individual and a social support-based exercise intervention were evaluated. The former  (Exercise-DVD) , aimed to prompt exercise with purpose-designed DVD and written materials, whereas the latter  (Exercise-Social support)  with community exercise social support groups. Costs and outcomes associated with these interventions were compared to those of a control group, who could only have an exercise consultation. An incremental cost-utility analysis was undertaken using bootstrapping to account for the uncertainty around cost-effectiveness point-estimates.    Main outcome measure  Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).    Results  Data for 261 women were available for analysis.  Exercise-DVD  was the most expensive and least effective intervention.  Exercise-Social support  was £52 (CIs: £18 to £86) and £18 (CIs: -£68 to £105) more expensive per woman than the control group at 6 and 12 months post-randomisation and led to 0.006 (CIs: -0.002 to 0.014) and 0.013 (CIs: -0.01 to 0.036) more QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £8,940 and £1,413 per QALY gained respectively.  Exercise-Social support  had 80%-90% probability of being cost-effective in the UK context. A societal perspective of analysis and a complete-case analysis led to similar findings.    Conclusions   Exercise-Social support  resulted in a small gain in health-related quality of life at a marginal additional cost in a context where broader wellbeing and long-term gains associated with exercise and social participation were not captured. Community exercise social support groups are very likely to be cost-effective in the management of vasomotor menopausal symptoms.

Aerobic exercise for vasomotor menopausal symptoms: A cost-utility analysis based on the Active Women trial