ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2024
Cost-utility analysis of transitional care services for older inpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Korea.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with a high readmission rate and poses a significant disease burden. South Korea initiated pilot projects on transitional care services (TCS) to reduce readmissions. However, evidence from cost-effectiveness analyses remains undiscovered. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TCS in patients with COPD from the healthcare system' perspective.
methodA cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov model containing six components of possible medical use after discharge. Transition probabilities and medical costs were extracted from the National Health Insurance Service Senior Cohort (NHIS-SC), and utility data were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results.
resultsConducting TCS produced an incremental quality-adjusted life years gain of 0.231, 0.275, 0.296 for those in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively, and cost savings of $225.16, $1668, and $2251.64 for those in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively, per patient over a 10-year time horizon. The deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the TCS cost and the cost of readmission by other diseases immensely impact the results. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is below $23,050 was over 85%, 93%, and 97% for those in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively.
conclusionsTCS was the dominant option compared to usual care. However, it is advantageous to the healthcare budget preferentially consider patients aged over 70 years with severe TCS symptoms. In addition, it is essential to include the management of underlying comorbidities in TCS intervention.
trial registrationClinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0007937. Registered on 24 November 2022.
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.