Economic evaluations of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for delirium: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.6 Q1 PSYCHIATRY SSM. Mental health Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI:10.1016/j.ssmmh.2025.100408
Md Parvez Mosharaf , Khorshed Alam , Jeff Gow , Rashidul Alam Mahumud
{"title":"Economic evaluations of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for delirium: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Md Parvez Mosharaf ,&nbsp;Khorshed Alam ,&nbsp;Jeff Gow ,&nbsp;Rashidul Alam Mahumud","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmmh.2025.100408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Delirium, a prevalent cognitive dysfunction in older adults, particularly in hospital and surgical settings, significantly increases patient morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. However, economic evaluations of healthcare interventions aimed at its prevention, management, and treatment are scant. This study synthesized the available economic evaluation evidence on both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review was conducted on studies published from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2023, across multiple databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and EBSCOhost (CINAHL, PsycINFO, and ECOLIT). We adhered to the PICOS framework for inclusion and exclusion criteria and followed PRISMA guidelines for the analysis. The quality of the studies included was assessed using the CHEERS checklist. The meta-analysis of the cost-effectiveness of multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was evaluated using incremental net benefits (INB).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixteen eligible studies met the inclusion criteria including four cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), two cost-benefit analyses (CBA), three cost-consequence analyses (CCA), and seven cost-saving/minimization analyses. The majority (14/16 studies) evaluated non-pharmacological interventions, while only two studies assessed the cost-effectiveness of drug interventions (i.e. dexmedetomidine). Besides the cost-effective multicomponent interventions, pharmacological intervention was also associated with a cost reduction of a maximum of US$4370 per patient by decreasing the length of ICU stays. The studies predominantly originated from high-income countries. The meta-analysis included four studies and pooled INB of multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was estimated at US$8014 (95% CI=US$1,060, US$14,969; p-value&lt;0.05) with significant heterogeneity among the studies (<em>I</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> = 100%; p-value&lt;0.01). The pooled INB was US$2657 higher for the model-based economic evaluation studies compared to within-trial evaluation.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The estimated INB indicated that multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was a cost-effective strategy to prevent and manage delirium cases which indicates improved patient outcomes and potential cost savings. Future research should focus on low-resource settings and direct comparisons of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to further enhance delirium management practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74861,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Mental health","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100408"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM. Mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666560325000209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Delirium, a prevalent cognitive dysfunction in older adults, particularly in hospital and surgical settings, significantly increases patient morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. However, economic evaluations of healthcare interventions aimed at its prevention, management, and treatment are scant. This study synthesized the available economic evaluation evidence on both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted on studies published from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2023, across multiple databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and EBSCOhost (CINAHL, PsycINFO, and ECOLIT). We adhered to the PICOS framework for inclusion and exclusion criteria and followed PRISMA guidelines for the analysis. The quality of the studies included was assessed using the CHEERS checklist. The meta-analysis of the cost-effectiveness of multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was evaluated using incremental net benefits (INB).

Results

Sixteen eligible studies met the inclusion criteria including four cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), two cost-benefit analyses (CBA), three cost-consequence analyses (CCA), and seven cost-saving/minimization analyses. The majority (14/16 studies) evaluated non-pharmacological interventions, while only two studies assessed the cost-effectiveness of drug interventions (i.e. dexmedetomidine). Besides the cost-effective multicomponent interventions, pharmacological intervention was also associated with a cost reduction of a maximum of US$4370 per patient by decreasing the length of ICU stays. The studies predominantly originated from high-income countries. The meta-analysis included four studies and pooled INB of multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was estimated at US$8014 (95% CI=US$1,060, US$14,969; p-value<0.05) with significant heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 100%; p-value<0.01). The pooled INB was US$2657 higher for the model-based economic evaluation studies compared to within-trial evaluation.

Conclusion

The estimated INB indicated that multicomponent non-pharmacological intervention was a cost-effective strategy to prevent and manage delirium cases which indicates improved patient outcomes and potential cost savings. Future research should focus on low-resource settings and direct comparisons of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to further enhance delirium management practices.
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
谵妄的药物和非药物干预的经济评价:系统回顾和荟萃分析
谵妄是老年人普遍存在的一种认知功能障碍,特别是在医院和外科环境中,它显著增加了患者的发病率、死亡率和医疗费用。然而,针对其预防、管理和治疗的卫生保健干预措施的经济评估不足。本研究综合了现有的药物和非药物干预的经济评价证据。方法对2000年1月1日至2023年12月31日在PubMed、MEDLINE、Scopus和EBSCOhost (CINAHL、PsycINFO和ECOLIT)等多个数据库中发表的研究进行系统评价。我们遵循PICOS框架的纳入和排除标准,并遵循PRISMA指南进行分析。使用CHEERS检查表评估纳入研究的质量。采用增量净收益(INB)对多组分非药物干预的成本-效果进行meta分析。结果16项研究符合纳入标准,包括4项成本-效果分析(CEA)、2项成本-效益分析(CBA)、3项成本-后果分析(CCA)和7项成本节约/最小化分析。大多数研究(14/16)评估了非药物干预措施,而只有两项研究评估了药物干预措施(即右美托咪定)的成本效益。除了具有成本效益的多组分干预措施外,药物干预还通过减少ICU住院时间,使每位患者的成本最多减少4370美元。这些研究主要来自高收入国家。该荟萃分析包括4项研究,多组分非药物干预的综合INB估计为8014美元(95% CI= 1,060美元,14,969美元;p值<;0.05),研究间存在显著异质性(I2 = 100%;p-value< 0.01)。与试验内评价相比,基于模型的经济评价研究的综合INB高出2657美元。结论估计的INB表明,多组分非药物干预是预防和管理谵妄病例的一种具有成本效益的策略,可以改善患者的预后并节省潜在的成本。未来的研究应侧重于低资源环境和直接比较药物和非药物方法,以进一步加强谵妄管理实践。
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
SSM. Mental health
SSM. Mental health Social Psychology, Health
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
118 days
期刊最新文献
An exploratory analysis of self-diagnosis on Reddit The price of shame: A scoping review examining the effects of shame on sexual and gender minority populations in the United States Response to Leboyer et al., 2026 An indigenous interpretation of self-determination in service of relational wellness What comes to mind when you hear the term ‘trauma’? A qualitative study of social representations of trauma in Ireland
×
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:604180095
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