Premium
Cost‐Utility Analysis of a Multidisciplinary Strategy to Manage Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Economic Evaluation of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Study
Author(s) -
Marra Carlo A.,
Grubisic Maja,
Cibere Jolanda,
Grindrod Kelly A.,
Woolcott John C.,
Gastonguay Louise,
Esdaile John M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
arthritis care and research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.032
H-Index - 163
eISSN - 2151-4658
pISSN - 2151-464X
DOI - 10.1002/acr.22232
Subject(s) - medicine , pharmacist , economic evaluation , multidisciplinary approach , physical therapy , pharmacy , confidence interval , randomized controlled trial , christian ministry , cost–benefit analysis , cost effectiveness , osteoarthritis , health care , family medicine , alternative medicine , ecology , social science , philosophy , risk analysis (engineering) , biology , economic growth , theology , pathology , sociology , economics
Objective To determine if a pharmacist‐initiated multidisciplinary strategy provides value for money compared to usual care in participants with previously undiagnosed knee osteoarthritis. Methods Pharmacies were randomly allocated to provide either 1) usual care and a pamphlet or 2) intervention care, which consisted of education, pain medication management by a pharmacist, physiotherapy‐guided exercise, and communication with the primary care physician. Costs and quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) were determined for patients assigned to each treatment and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were determined. Results From the Ministry of Health perspective, the average patient in the intervention group generated slightly higher costs compared with usual care. Similar findings were obtained when using the societal perspective. The intervention resulted in ICERs of $232 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] −1,530, 2,154) per QALY gained from the Ministry of Health perspective and $14,395 (95% CI 7,826, 23,132) per QALY gained from the societal perspective, compared with usual care. Conclusion A pharmacist‐initiated, multidisciplinary program was good value for money from both the societal and Ministry of Health perspectives.