ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2026
Health economic evaluation of an interdisciplinary care pathway for older patients with vertigo, dizziness and balance disorders in primary care (MobilE-PHY2) - a cluster-randomised trial.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVertigo, dizziness and balance disorders affect over half of adults aged 65 and older. The MobilE-PHY2 study, conducted in Germany, evaluated the effectiveness of an evidence-based, multidisciplinary care pathway for this population. From a health economic perspective, the intervention was expected to increase outpatient and physiotherapy costs while reducing resource utilisation in other healthcare areas and improving patient-relevant outcomes.
objectiveThis health economic evaluation examined the cost-effectiveness of the care pathway compared to optimised routine care. Incremental costs were related to incremental changes in both quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) as a disease-specific outcome; expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).
methodsThe study was a multicentre, cluster-randomised controlled trial with six -month follow-up. The health economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Cost-effectiveness was determined via incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Uncertainty was addressed using cost-effectiveness acceptability and net-monetary-benefit curves. Missing data were handled using Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations. Sensitivity analyses excluded informal care costs and focused on a subgroup with reduced imputation uncertainty.
resultsThe ICER was 81,246.85€ per additional patient achieving a clinically relevant DHI improvement. Indicating that if the willingness-to-pay threshold were €50,000 per additional patient achieving a clinically relevant DHI improvement, the intervention would be cost-effective with 71% probability. The ICUR was negative (-121,847.54€/QALY), meaning optimised routine care dominated the intervention. From a payer perspective, the intervention was less costly, though with lower QALYs. Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses.
conclusionThe care pathway shows potential for cost-effectiveness among patients achieving DHI improvements, supporting cautious, targeted implementation in routine care. Future research should address the economic burden on informal caregivers.
trial registrationDRKS00028524 retrospectively registered on March 24, 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.