Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33079374›Full record

SynthesisApplied health economics and health policy2021

The Cost-Effectiveness of Pulmonary Rehabilitation for COPD in Different Settings: A Systematic Review.

Shengnan Liu, Qiheng Zhao, Wenshuo Li, Xuetong Zhao, Kun Li

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Applied health economics and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Value of Information Analysis of a Web-Based Self-Management Intervention for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shengnan LiuSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, No. 965 Xinjiang Street, Changchun, 130021, China.
Qiheng ZhaoOrthopaedics Department, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Wenshuo LiSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, No. 965 Xinjiang Street, Changchun, 130021, China.
Xuetong ZhaoSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, No. 965 Xinjiang Street, Changchun, 130021, China.
Kun LiSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, No. 965 Xinjiang Street, Changchun, 130021, China. lik@jlu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0976-2186

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has high morbidity and mortality rates. COPD impairs body functioning, reduces quality of life, and creates a great economic burden for society. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has become an important nonpharmacological treatment for COPD. This paper systematically reviews economic evaluations of PR in COPD patients in different settings.

objectivesWe aimed to understand the cost-effectiveness of PR in different settings for COPD to provide economic evidence for decision-makers.

methodsWe searched eight databases from their inception to 23 November 2019. The results were presented in terms of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and the decision uncertainty was expressed by cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). We used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria to assess study quality.

resultsThis review included ten studies that matched the selection criteria. Five studies compared PR with usual care in primary healthcare or outpatient departments. Two studies compared community-based PR with hospital PR or usual care. In the other studies, PR was mainly carried out at home. Compared with usual care, PR was cost-effective in primary healthcare institutions or outpatient departments. According to CEACs, community-based PR had a 50% probability of cost-effectiveness at £30,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) compared with hospital PR in the UK. Based on the ICER, community-based PR was "moderately" cost-effective, with a ratio of €32,425/QALY compared with usual care in the Netherlands. Home-based PR was dominant compared with usual care, and tele-rehabilitation was dominant compared with traditional home PR.

conclusionsPR conducted in different settings can potentially be cost-effective, as measured using QALY or the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ).

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuality of LifeCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansNetherlandsQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

PMID33079374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.