ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2022
Cost-effectiveness of integrated disease management for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a primary care setting.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of COPD and comorbidities in COPD patients by dispensing pharmaceutical care following Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease-guidelines (GOLD guidelines 2020): a prospective randomized clinical trial.BMC health services research · 2026Trial
- Integrating Disease Burden and Cost-Effectiveness for Value-Based Prioritisation of COPD Interventions: A Narrative Review.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Review
- Hospitalizations and inpatient resource consumption of patients suffering from chronic disease - Past trend and forecast for Switzerland.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Investing in Primary Care to Reduce the Burden of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.China CDC weekly · 2025Article
- Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy in Primary Care Across Europe: Expert Panel Consensus on the Consequences of Payer-Driven Access Rules and Call to Action.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Breaking down barriers to COPD management in primary care: applying the updated 2023 Canadian Thoracic Society guideline for pharmacotherapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Real-World Cost-Consequence Analysis of an Integrated Chronic Disease Management Program in Saskatchewan, Canada.Health services insights · 2024Article
- Estimating the Health and Economic Impact of Improved Management in Prevalent Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Populations in England, Germany, Canada, and Japan: A Modelling Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 'Best Care' integrated disease management (IDM) program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to usual care (UC) within a primary care setting from the perspective of a publicly funded health system (i.e., Ontario, Canada).
methodsWe conducted a model-based, cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with expected values of costs and outcomes derived from a Monte-Carlo Simulation with 5000 replications. The target population included patients started in GOLD II with a starting age of 68 years in the trial-based analysis. Key input parameters were based on a randomized control trial of 143 patients (i.e., UC (n = 73) versus IDM program (n = 70)). Results were shown as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.
resultsThe IDM program for high risk, exacerbation prone, patients is dominant in comparison with the UC group. After one year, the IDM program demonstrated cost savings and improved QALYs (i.e., UC was dominated by IDM) with a positive net-benefit of $5360 (95% CI: ($5175, $5546) based on a willingness to pay of $50,000 (CAN) per QALY.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the IDM intervention for patients with COPD in a primary care setting is cost-effective in comparison to the standard of care. By demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of IDM, we confirm that investment in the delivery of evidence based best practices in primary care delivers better patient outcomes at a lower cost than UC.
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.