Trial reportArthritis care & research2022
Economic Evaluation of the Dr. Bart Application in Individuals With Knee and/or Hip Osteoarthritis.
Trial report in Arthritis care & research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Effect and Safety of App-Based Interventions for Populations With Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered nutrition interventions: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Nutrition reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation Associated With Clinical-Grade Mobile App-Based Digital Therapeutic Interventions: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Development of the Happy Hands Self-Management App for People with Hand Osteoarthritis: Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Trial
- Health economic evaluations of digital health technologies-a rapid review of applied methods.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- An Overview on Methods, Evidence, and Study Quality of Health Economic Evaluation Studies for Independently Usable Digital Health Apps: Rapid Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Early Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Intra-articular Delivery of a PBAE-DEX Conjugate for Osteoarthritis in a UK Population.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Article
- mHealth for the Self-management of Knee Osteoarthritis: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of a single-arm 12-week digital behavioral health intervention in patients with knee osteoarthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of the dr. Bart app compared to usual care in people with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knees and hips, applying a health care payer perspective.
methodsThis economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 6-month randomized controlled trial that included 427 participants. The dr. Bart app is a stand-alone eHealth application that invites users to select pre-formulated goals (i.e., "tiny habits") and triggers for a healthier lifestyle. Self-reported outcome measures were health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol 5-dimension 3-level (EQ-5D-3L) descriptive system, the EuroQol visual analog scale (QALY VAS), patient activation measure 13 (PAM-13), and 5 subscales of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score/Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Missing data were multiply imputed, and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.
resultsThe mean ± SD age of the study participants was 62.1 ± 7.3 years, and the majority of participants were female (72%). Health care costs were lower in the intervention group compared to the group who received usual care (€-22 [95% confidence interval €-36, -3]). For QALY and QALY VAS, the probability of the dr. Bart app being cost-effective compared to usual care was 0.71 and 0.67, respectively, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €10,000 and 0.64 and 0.56, respectively, at a WTP of €80.000. For self-management behavior, symptoms, pain, and activities of daily living, the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost-effective was >0.82, and the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost-effective in the areas of activities and quality of life was <0.40, regardless of WTP thresholds.
conclusionThis economic evaluation showed that costs were lower for the dr. Bart app group compared to the group who received usual care. Given the noninvasive nature of the intervention and the moderate probability of it being cost-effective for the majority of outcomes, the dr. Bart app has the potential to serve as a tool to provide education and goal setting in OA and its treatment options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.