Trial reportScandinavian journal of rheumatology2025
Cost-utility analysis of longstanding exercise therapy versus usual care in people with rheumatoid arthritis and severe functional limitations.
Trial report in Scandinavian journal of rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-utility of long-term exercise therapy in people with axial spondyloarthritis and severe functional limitations: a randomized, controlled trial.Rheumatology international · 2026Trial
- Rehabilitation for People with Inflammatory Arthritis: Meeting the Challenges of a Changing Healthcare Landscape.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of longstanding personalized exercise therapy compared with usual care in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and severe functional disability.
methodIn this cost-utility analysis of a randomized controlled trial (n = 215), with 1 year follow-up, the study population comprised individuals with RA and reported severe difficulties in performing basic daily activities. Assessments were at baseline, 12, 26, and 52 weeks, with measurements of costs including medical and non-medical costs as recorded by patients and healthcare providers. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated using the EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) and EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS). Costs and QALY differences were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.
resultsThe 1 year societal costs were non-significantly in favour of the usual care group, with a small difference of €180 [95% confidence interval (CI) €-4493 to €4852]. The QALYs were non-significantly in favour of the intervention group, by 0.02 according to the EQ-5D-5L (95% CI -0.05 to 0.09) and by 0.04 according to the EQ-VAS (95% CI 0.00 to 0.08). For a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY, the intervention was the cost-effective strategy with 60% certainty.
conclusionThis economic evaluation showed no clear economic preference for either group, as the intervention costs were higher in the intervention group, but partly compensated by other cost savings and improved QALYs. Despite severe RA, patients had better clinical outcomes compared with usual care, suggesting no economic reasons to refrain from exercise therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register NL8235, included in the International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP) (https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL8235).
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.