Early economic evaluation of the digital gait analysis system for fall prevention–Preliminary analysis of the GaitSmart system

IF 2.2 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Aging Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-07 DOI:10.1002/agm2.12290
Fernando Zanghelini, G. Xydopoulos, Richard Fordham, Geraldine Rodgers, Saval Khanal
{"title":"Early economic evaluation of the digital gait analysis system for fall prevention–Preliminary analysis of the GaitSmart system","authors":"Fernando Zanghelini, G. Xydopoulos, Richard Fordham, Geraldine Rodgers, Saval Khanal","doi":"10.1002/agm2.12290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To develop an early economics evaluation (EEE) to assess the cost‐effectiveness of the GS in reducing the RoF and FoF.A cost‐effectiveness analysis (CEA) with a return on investment (RoI) estimation was performed. CEA used the most relevant parameters, such as increased gait speed and decreased FoF, to estimate the reduction in the RoF, the impact on health care resources used and financial implications for the National Health System in the United Kingdom. Outcomes were measured as incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio per quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) gained based on the reduction of the RoF and FoF. Uncertainties around the main parameters used were evaluated by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.The CEA results showed that the GS is a dominant strategy over the standard of care to improve the movements of older persons who have suffered a fall or are afraid of falling (incremental QALYs based on FoF = 0.77 and QALYs based on RoF = 1.07, cost of FoF = ‐£4479.57 and cost of RoF = ‐£2901.79). By implementing the GS, the ROI results suggest that every pound invested in the GS could result in cost savings of £1.85/patient based on the RoF reduction and £11.16/patient based on the FoF reduction. The probability of being cost saving based on the number of iterations were 79.4 percent (based on FoF) and 100 percent (based on RoF).The EEE supports the main hypothesis that the GS is an effective intervention to avoid falls and is potentially cost saving.","PeriodicalId":32862,"journal":{"name":"Aging Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/agm2.12290","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To develop an early economics evaluation (EEE) to assess the cost‐effectiveness of the GS in reducing the RoF and FoF.A cost‐effectiveness analysis (CEA) with a return on investment (RoI) estimation was performed. CEA used the most relevant parameters, such as increased gait speed and decreased FoF, to estimate the reduction in the RoF, the impact on health care resources used and financial implications for the National Health System in the United Kingdom. Outcomes were measured as incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio per quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) gained based on the reduction of the RoF and FoF. Uncertainties around the main parameters used were evaluated by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.The CEA results showed that the GS is a dominant strategy over the standard of care to improve the movements of older persons who have suffered a fall or are afraid of falling (incremental QALYs based on FoF = 0.77 and QALYs based on RoF = 1.07, cost of FoF = ‐£4479.57 and cost of RoF = ‐£2901.79). By implementing the GS, the ROI results suggest that every pound invested in the GS could result in cost savings of £1.85/patient based on the RoF reduction and £11.16/patient based on the FoF reduction. The probability of being cost saving based on the number of iterations were 79.4 percent (based on FoF) and 100 percent (based on RoF).The EEE supports the main hypothesis that the GS is an effective intervention to avoid falls and is potentially cost saving.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预防跌倒的数字步态分析系统的早期经济评估--对 GaitSmart 系统的初步分析
开展早期经济学评估(EEE),评估GS在降低RoF和FoF方面的成本效益。成本效益分析采用了最相关的参数,如步速的增加和FoF的降低,来估算RoF的降低、对所使用的医疗资源的影响以及对英国国家卫生系统的财务影响。根据RoF和FoF的降低情况,以每质量调整生命年(QALYs)的增量成本效益比来衡量结果。成本效益分析结果表明,与标准护理相比,GS 是改善跌倒或害怕跌倒的老年人行动的主要策略(基于 FoF 的增量 QALYs = 0.77,基于 RoF 的增量 QALYs = 1.07,FoF 的成本 = -4479.57 英镑,RoF 的成本 = -2901.79 英镑)。通过实施 GS,投资回报率结果表明,基于 RoF 的降低,投资于 GS 的每英镑可为每位患者节省 1.85 英镑的成本,基于 FoF 的降低,可为每位患者节省 11.16 英镑的成本。根据迭代次数计算的成本节约概率分别为 79.4%(基于 FoF)和 100%(基于 RoF)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Aging Medicine
Aging Medicine Medicine-Geriatrics and Gerontology
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Uncontrolled blood pressure among the established hypertensive elderly people in Jashore, Bangladesh: A cross-sectional type of observational study Analysis of mortality in Parkinson disease in China: Exploration of recent and future trends Renal perfusion examination with contrast-enhanced ultrasound in vascular surgery The efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in elderly patients with gastric cancer: A subgroup analysis of the NEOSUMMIT-01 study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1