To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST programme) compared to physiotherapy assessment and advice (best practice advice [BPA]) for older adults with neurogenic claudication (NC) which is a debilitating spinal condition. A randomised controlled trial of 438 participants. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 12 months. Data was also collected at 6 months. Other outcomes included Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire (symptoms), ODI walking item, 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and falls. The analysis was intention-to-treat. We collected the EQ5D and health and social care use to estimate cost-effectiveness. Participants were, on average, 74.9 years old (SD 6.0). There was no significant difference in ODI scores between groups at 12 months (adjusted mean difference (MD): −1.4 [95% Confidence Intervals (CI) −4.03,1.17]), but, at 6 months, ODI scores favoured the BOOST programme (adjusted MD: −3.7 [95% CI −6.27, −1.06]). Symptoms followed a similar pattern. The BOOST programme resulted in greater improvements in walking capacity (6MWT MD 21.7m [95% CI 5.96, 37.38]) and ODI walking item (MD −0.2 [95% CI −0.45, −0.01]) and reduced falls risk (odds ratio 0.6 [95% CI 0.40, 0.98]) compared to BPA at 12 months. Probability that the BOOST programme is cost-effective ranged from 67%–89% across cost-effectiveness thresholds.Purpose and background
Methods and results
The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of
intramedullary nail fixation and ‘locking’ plate fixation in the
treatment of extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia. An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of
the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) and personal social
services (PSS), based on evidence from the Fixation of Distal Tibia
Fractures (UK FixDT) multicentre parallel trial. Data from 321 patients
were available for analysis. Costs were collected prospectively
over the 12-month follow-up period using trial case report forms
and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was
reported in terms of incremental cost per quality adjusted life
year (QALY) gained, and net monetary benefit. Sensitivity analyses
were conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates.Aim
Patients and Methods