ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Economic evaluation of advanced practice physiotherapy models of care for upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders In Denmark: a registry-based cohort study.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvanced practice physiotherapy (APP) models of care, which provide greater autonomy and responsibility to physiotherapists, have emerged as promising solutions to increase healthcare access while providing cost-effective care for MSK disorders. A formal health economic evaluation of these models has yet to be undertaken in Denmark.
objectivesTo perform a registry-based economic evaluation of APP care versus standard care models for managing upper extremity MSK disorders in four Danish orthopedic clinics in the societal perspective.
methodsData related to sociodemographic, diagnoses, healthcare resource use, medication, costs, and sickness benefits within a two-year period after the initial consultation were extracted from Danish databases. Total healthcare costs including primary care (medical and rehabilitation), medication and hospital costs were calculated as well as productivity loss. Costs were converted to Euros 2022. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for confounders.
resultsA total of 13,517 patients were included in the main analysis. Healthcare cost distribution differed between the two models with higher rehabilitation (mean difference [MD]: €18; 95% CI: 8 to 28) but lower medication (MD: -€50; 95% CI: -58 to -43) costs with the APP model of care. However, there was no significant difference in total healthcare costs (MD: €86; 95% CI: -305 to 476) nor in productivity loss (MD: €197; 95% CI: -1678 to 2072) between the two models.
conclusionAPP care results in similar total healthcare costs and productivity loss when compared to standard care for adults with upper extremity MSK disorders.
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.