Explore the vast range of titles available.

Geriatric patients requiring rehabilitation and admitted to short-term care after an acute inpatient hospital stay seldom receive rehabilitative services later. Rehabilitative short-term care (REKUP) supplements short-term care with rehabilitative measures, aiming to prevent functional restrictions and long-term care. To conduct a cost and cost-effectiveness analyses of REKUP and provide data for a nationwide rollout. A non-randomized controlled prospective study was carried out. The intervention group (IG) was paired 1:2 with a control group (KG), resulting in the formation of three collectives with follow-up periods of either 30, 90 or 180 days (each with IG and KG). Using administrative claims data from the AOK Baden-Württemberg, the mean total costs from the perspective of the health insurance were calculated. A potential impact of the intervention on costs was analyzed using the difference in differences approach. The analysis comprised 129 patients (IG 43; KG 86). During the follow-up periods, the IG presented higher rates of rehabilitation and lower rates of long-term care and mortality. Regarding costs, no statistically significant differences were found between the IG and KG in any of the three collectives. For nursing care and medication costs, costs were significantly higher in the follow-up period for the KG, whereas costs for rehabilitation were significantly higher for the IG (p < 0.001). Patients receiving REKUP utilize rehabilitation services more often and have a lower likelihood of requiring nursing care or dying with no statistically significant differences in costs. There are potential advantages of REKUP in the target population, which warrant further investigation due to methodological limitations.

Acute Care for Elders Units offer enhanced care for older adults in specially designed hospital units. The care is delivered by interdisciplinary teams, which can include geriatricians, advanced practice nurses, social workers, pharmacists, and physical therapists. In a randomized controlled trial of 1,632 elderly patients, length-of-stay was significantly shorter-6.7 days per patient versus 7.3 days per patient- among those receiving care in the Acute Care for Elders Unit compared to usual care. This difference produced lower total inpatient costs-$9,477 per patient versus $10,451 per patient-while maintaining patients' functional abilities and not increasing hospital readmission rates. The practices of Acute Care for Elders Units, and the principles they embody, can provide hospitals with effective strategies for lowering costs while preserving quality of care for hospitalized elders. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Depression is a common and costly comorbidity in dementia. There are very few data on the cost-effectiveness of antidepressants for depression in dementia and their effects on carer outcomes. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sertraline and mirtazapine compared with placebo for depression in dementia. A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial with a parallel cost-effectiveness analysis (trial registration: ISRCTN88882979 and EudraCT 2006-000105-38). The primary cost-effectiveness analysis compared differences in treatment costs for patients receiving sertraline, mirtazapine or placebo with differences in effectiveness measured by the primary outcome, total Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) score, over two time periods: 0-13 weeks and 0-39 weeks. The secondary evaluation was a cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) computed from the Euro-Qual (EQ-5D) and societal weights over those same periods. There were 339 participants randomised and 326 with costs data (111 placebo, 107 sertraline, 108 mirtazapine). For the primary outcome, decrease in depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective compared with placebo. However, examining secondary outcomes, the time spent by unpaid carers caring for participants in the mirtazapine group was almost half that for patients receiving placebo (6.74 v. 12.27 hours per week) or sertraline (6.74 v. 12.32 hours per week). Informal care costs over 39 weeks were £1510 and £1522 less for the mirtazapine group compared with placebo and sertraline respectively. In terms of reducing depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective for treating depression in dementia. However, mirtazapine does appear likely to have been cost-effective if costing includes the impact on unpaid carers and with quality of life included in the outcome. Unpaid (family) carer costs were lower with mirtazapine than sertraline or placebo. This may have been mediated via the putative ability of mirtazapine to ameliorate sleep disturbances and anxiety. Given the priority and the potential value of supporting family carers of people with dementia, further research is warranted to investigate the potential of mirtazapine to help with behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia and in supporting carers.

Background The REtirement in ACTion (REACT) study is a multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an internal pilot phase. It aims to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community, group-based physical activity intervention for reducing, or reversing, the progression of functional limitations in older people who are at high risk of mobility-related disability. Methods/design A sample of 768 sedentary, community-dwelling, older people aged 65 years and over with functional limitations, but who are still ambulatory (scores between 4 and 9 out of 12 in the Short Physical Performance Battery test (SPPB)) will be randomised to receive either the REACT intervention, delivered over a period of 12 months by trained facilitators, or a minimal control intervention. The REACT study incorporates comprehensive process and economic evaluation and a nested sub-study which will test the hypothesis that the REACT intervention will slow the rate of brain atrophy and of decline in cognitive function assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Outcome data will be collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months for the main study, with MRI sub-study data collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome analysis (SPPB score at 24 months) will be undertaken blinded to group allocation. Primary comparative analyses will be on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis with due emphasis placed on confidence intervals. Discussion REACT represents the first large-scale, pragmatic, community-based trial in the UK to target the non-disabled but high-risk segment of the older population with an intervention to reduce mobility-related disability. A programme that can successfully engage this population in sufficient activity to improve strength, aerobic capacity, coordination and balance would have a major impact on sustaining health and independence. REACT is also the first study of its kind to conduct a full economic and comprehensive process evaluation alongside the RCT. If effective and cost-effective, the REACT intervention has strong potential to be implemented widely in the UK and elsewhere. Trial registration ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN45627165 . Retrospectively registered on 13 June 2016. Trial sponsor: University of Bath. Protocol Version 1.5.

Psychological therapy groups for people with dementia are widely used, but their cost-effectiveness has not been explored. To investigate the cost-effectiveness of an evidence-based cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) programme for people with dementia as part of a randomised controlled trial. A total of 91 people with dementia, living in care homes or the community, received a CST group intervention twice weekly for 8 weeks; 70 participants with dementia received treatment as usual. Service use was recorded 8 weeks before and during the 8-week intervention and costs were calculated. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with cognition as the primary outcome, and quality of life as the secondary outcome. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were plotted. Cognitive stimulation therapy has benefits for cognition and quality of life in dementia, and costs were not different between the groups. Under reasonable assumptions, there is a high probability that CST is more cost-effective than treatment as usual, with regard to both outcome measures. Cognitive stimulation therapy for people with dementia has effectiveness advantages over, and may be more cost-effective than, treatment as usual.

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent or postpone new disabilities in community-living older people in comparison with usual care. We conducted cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses alongside a cluster randomized trial with one-year follow-up. Participants were aged ≥ 70 years and at increased risk of functional decline. Participants in the intervention group (n = 1209) received a comprehensive geriatric assessment and individually tailored multifactorial interventions coordinated by a community-care registered nurse with multiple follow-up visits. The control group (n = 1074) received usual care. Costs were assessed from a healthcare perspective. Outcome measures included disability (modified Katz-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) index score), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated using bootstrapped bivariate regression models while adjusting for confounders. There were no statistically significant differences in Katz-ADL index score and QALYs between the two groups. Total mean costs were significantly higher in the intervention group (EUR 6518 (SE 472) compared with usual care (EUR 5214 (SE 338); adjusted mean difference €1457 (95% CI: 572; 2537). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.14 at a willingness to pay (WTP) of EUR 50,000 per one point improvement on the Katz-ADL index score and 0.04 at a WTP of EUR 50,000 per QALY gained. The current intervention was not cost-effective compared to usual care to prevent or postpone new disabilities over a one-year period. Based on these findings, implementation of the evaluated multifactorial nurse-led care model is not to be recommended.

Background This study investigates the use of an information and communication technology (Elder Tree) designed for older adults and their informal caregivers to improve older adult quality of life and address challenges older adults face in maintaining their independence (for example, loneliness and isolation, falling, managing medications, driving and transportation). Methods/Design This study, an unblinded randomized controlled trial, will evaluate the effectiveness and cost of Elder Tree. Older adults who are at risk for losing their independence - along with their informal caregivers, if they name them - are randomized to two groups. The intervention group has access to their usual sources of information and communication as well as to Elder Tree for 18 months while the control group uses only their usual sources of information and communication. The primary outcome of the study is older adult quality of life. Secondary outcomes are cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year and the impact of the technology on independence, loneliness, falls, medication management, driving and transportation, and caregiver appraisal and mastery. We will also examine the mediating effect of self-determination theory. We will evaluate the effectiveness of Elder Tree by comparing intervention- and control-group participants at baseline and months 6, 12, and 18. We will use mixed-effect models to evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes, where pretest score functions as a covariate, treatment condition is a between-subjects factor, and the multivariate outcome reflects scores for a given assessment at the three time points. Separate analyses will be conducted for each outcome. Cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year will be compared between the intervention and control groups. Additional analyses will examine the mediating effect of self-determination theory on each outcome. Discussion Elder Tree is a multifaceted intervention, making it a challenge to assess which services or combinations of services account for outcomes in which subsets of older adults. If Elder Tree can improve quality of life and reduce healthcare costs among older adults, it could suggest a promising way to ease the burden that advancing age can place on older adults, their families, and the healthcare system. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02128789 . Registered on 26 March 2014.

Background Most older adults want to live independently in a familiar environment instead of moving to a nursing home. Preventive home visits based on multidimensional geriatric assessment can be one strategy to support this preference and might additionally reduce health care costs, due to the avoidance of costly nursing home admissions. The purpose of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of preventive home visits from a societal perspective in Germany. Methods This study is part of a multi-centre, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial aiming at the reduction of nursing home admissions. Participants were older than 80 years and living at home. Up to three home visits were conducted to identify self-care deficits and risk factors, to present recommendations and to implement solutions. The control group received usual care. A cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALY) based on the EQ-5D was performed. Resource utilization was assessed by means of the interview version of a patient questionnaire. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve controlled for prognostic variables was constructed and a sensitivity analysis to control for the influence of the mode of QALY calculation was performed. Results 278 individuals (intervention group: 133; control group: 145) were included in the analysis. During 18 months follow-up mean adjusted total cost (mean: +4,401 EUR; bootstrapped standard error: 3,019.61 EUR) and number of QALY (mean: 0.0061 QALY; bootstrapped standard error: 0.0388 QALY) were higher in the intervention group, but differences were not significant. For preventive home visits the probability of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <50,000 EUR per QALY was only 15%. The results were robust with respect to the mode of QALY calculation. Conclusions The evaluated preventive home visits programme is unlikely to be cost-effective. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00644826 .

Background. Late life depression can be successfully treated with antidepressant medications or psychotherapy, but few depressed older adults receive effective treatment. Research Design. A randomized controlled trial of a disease management program for late life depression. Subjects. Approximately 1,750 older adults with major depression or dysthymia are recruited from seven national study sites. Intervention. Half of the subjects are randomly assigned to a collaborative care program where a depression clinical specialist supervised by a psychiatrist and a primary care expert supports the patient's regular primary care provider to treat depression. Intervention services are provided for 12 months using antidepressant medications and Problem Solving Treatment in Primary Care according to a stepped care protocol that varies intervention intensity according to clinical needs. The other half of the subjects are assigned to care as usual. Evaluation. Subjects are independently assessed at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months. The evaluation assesses the incremental cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared with care as usual. Specific outcomes examined include care for depression, depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, satisfaction with depression care, health care costs, patient time costs, market and nonmarket productivity, and household income. Conclusions. The study blends methods from health services and clinical research in an effort to protect internal validity while maximizing the generalizability of results to diverse health care systems. We hope that this study will show the cost-effectiveness of a new model of care for late life depression that can be applied in a range of primary care settings.

Background Currently, health care and medical decision-making at the end of life for older people are often insufficiently patient-centred. In this trial we study the effects of Advance Care Planning (ACP), a formalised process of timely communication about care preferences at the end of life, for frail older people. Methods/Design We will conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial among older people residing in care homes or receiving home care in the Netherlands. The intervention group will receive the ACP program Respecting Choices® in addition to usual care. The control group will receive usual care only. Participants in both groups will fill out questionnaires at baseline and after 12 months. We hypothesize that ACP will lead to better patient activation in medical decision making and quality of life, while reducing the number of medical interventions and thus health care costs. Multivariate analysis will be used to compare differences between the intervention group and the control group at baseline and to compare differences in changes after 12 months following the inclusion. Discussion Our study can contribute to more understanding of the effects of ACP on patient activation and quality of life in frail older people. Further, we will gain insight in the costs and cost-effectiveness of ACP. This study will facilitate ACP policy for older people in the Netherlands. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register: NTR4454 .