ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2026
[Rheuma-VOR-Health economic evaluation of early rheumatological diagnosis : Summary of the G-BA report].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 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
backgroundRheuma-VOR was initiated to reduce long waiting times for specialist diagnosis and guideline-based therapy initiation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).
methodsRheuma-VOR is a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter network study with an embedded health economic evaluation. Using a quasi-experimental cohort design and propensity score matching, the intervention group (Rheuma-VOR) was compared with standard care (national database). Direct costs (medications, hospital, and rehabilitation) and indirect costs (productivity losses) were analyzed from a societal perspective.
resultsRheuma-VOR achieved total savings of € 3.84 million versus standard care, mainly due to fewer hospitalizations (-€ 1.15 million), reduced drug costs (-€ 2.03 million), and improved work capacity (-€ 0.70 million indirect costs). Fewer biologics were prescribed (2.4 % vs. 11.8 %). The model demonstrated a dominant cost-effectiveness profile: similar or better health-related quality of life at lower total costs (Rheuma-VOR: € 2,445.17/patient, 95 % confidence interval [CI] € 1,955.79-€ 3,041.50; standard care: € 3,107.33/patient, 95% CI € 1,958.28-€ 3,997.62). Annual coordination center costs (€ 272.35/patient) were fully offset by savings.
conclusionStructured, cross-sectoral care models like Rheuma-VOR reduce diagnostic delays, optimize resource use, and are economically sustainable. Long-term benefits include additional savings through prevention of irreversible damage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42758326What 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.