Capturing Patient Value in an Economic Evaluation

OBJECTIVE: Economic evaluations predominantly use generic outcomes, such as EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), to assess the health status. However, because of the generic nature, they are less suitable to capture the quality of life of patients with specific conditions. Given the transition to patient-centered (remote) care delivery, this study aims to evaluate the possibility to use disease-specific measures in a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA).METHODS: A real-life cohort from Maasstad Hospital (2020-2021) in the Netherlands, with 772 Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients, was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of electronic consultations (e-consultations) compared with face-to-face consultations. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) based on the generic EQ-5D was compared with ICER's based on RA specific measures; Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). To compare the cost-effectiveness of these different measures, HAQ-DI and RAID were expressed in QALYs via estimated conversion equations.CONCLUSIONS: The conventional ICER (e.g. EQ-5D) indicates that e-consultations are cost-effective with cost savings of - €161k per QALY gained for a prevalent RA cohort treated in a secondary trainee hospital. RA specific measures show similar results, with ICER's of - €163k per HAQ-DI(QALY) and - €223k per RAID(QALY) gained. RA specific measures capture patient-relevant domains and offer the opportunity to improve the assessment and treatment of the disease impact.DISCUSSION: Disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) offer a promising alternative for traditional measures in economic evaluations, capturing patient-relevant domains more comprehensively. As PROMs are increasingly applied in clinical practice, the next step entails modelling of a RA patient-wide conversion equation to implement PROMs in economic evaluations. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.</p

The IMPACT study:A clustered randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of a referral algorithm for axial spondyloarthritis

Background A substantial number of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) have axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), but early recognition of these patients is difficult for general practitioners (GPs). The Case Finding Axial Spondyloarthritis (CaFaSpA) referral strategy has shown to be able to identify patients with CLBP at risk for axSpA, but its impact on clinical daily practice is yet unknown. Objective To assess the effect of the CaFaSpA referral strategy on pain caused by disability in primary care patients with CLBP. Methods Within this clustered randomized controlled trial 93 general practices were randomized to either the CaFaSpA referral model (intervention) or usual primary care (control). In each group primary care patients between 18 and 45 years with CLBP were included. The primary outcome was disability caused by CLBP, measured with the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at baseline and four months. Secondary outcome was the frequency of new axSpA diagnosis. Descriptive analyses were performed, and a linear mixed-effects model was used. Results In total 679 CLBP patients were included of which 333 patients were allocated to the intervention group and 346 to the control group. Sixty-four percent were female and mean age was 36.2 years. The mean RMDQ score at baseline was 8.39 in the intervention group and 8.61 in the control group. At four months mean RMDQ score was 7.65 in the intervention group and 8.15 in the control group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.50). Six (8%) out of the 75 finally referred patients, were diagnosed with axSpA by their rheumatologist. Conclusions The CaFaSpA referral strategy for axSpA did not have an effect on disability after four months caused by CLBP. However, the strategy is able to detect the axSpA patient within the large CLBP population sufficiently

Qualitative Descriptive Research Investigating Burn Survivors’ Perspectives on Quality of Care Aspects

Burn care quality indicators are used to monitor and improve quality of care and for benchmark purposes. The perspectives of burn survivors, however, are not included in current sets of quality indicators while patient-centred care gains importance. The aim of this study was to explore burn survivors’ perspectives on quality aspects of burn care, which was used to translate their perspectives into patient-centred quality of care indicators. Qualitative descriptive research was conducted in a patient panel group. First, thematic analysis was applied to the focus groups to identify overarching themes. Second, patient-centred quality indicators, informed by burn survivors’ valued aspects of care, were defined. Ten burn survivors with an average age of 54 years (SD = 11; range 38–72 years) and mean TBSA burned of 14% (SD = 11%; range 5–35%) participated in two focus groups. Four overarching themes were identified, pointing to the importance of (1) information tailored to the different phases of recovery, (2) significant others’ wellbeing and involvement, (3) a therapeutic relationship and low-threshold access to healthcare professionals and (4) to participate in decision-making. Eighteen patient-centred process quality of care indicators within nine aspects of care were formulated. The overarching themes are reflected in patient-centred quality indicators, which present a broadened and complementary view of existing clinical quality indicators for burn care. Evaluating these patient-centred quality indicators may increase quality of care and refine patient-centred care.</p

Work outcome in yet undiagnosed patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: results of a cross-sectional study among patients with chronic low back pain

Abstract Background To understand the impact of yet undiagnosed non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) on work outcomes in a cohort of patients with long-lasting chronic low back pain (CLBP). Methods Data were used from a primary care CLBP cohort that was established to understand the prevalence of nr-axSpA and AS. Clinical characteristics comprised measures of back pain (visual analogue scale), inflammation (C-reactive protein) and physical functioning (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)). Worker outcomes comprised a question on employment and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire, distinguishing absenteeism, presenteeism, and overall work impairment in those employed and activity impairment in all patients. For each disease subgroup, employment ratio compared to the general population was assessed by indirect standardization. Factors associated with work productivity were explored by zero inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression models. Results Patients with CLBP (n = 579) were included (41% male, mean age 36 years), of whom 71 (12%) were identified as having nr-axSpA and 24 (4%) as having AS. The standardized employment ratios were 0.89 (95% CI 0.84–0.94), 0.97 (95% CI 0.85–1.09) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.56–1.06) for patients with CLBP, nr-axSpA and AS, respectively. Scores for the WPAI subdomains were not significantly different between patients with CLBP, nr-axSpA or AS. The ZINB models showed significant associations between visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain and RMDQ and work productivity. Conclusion The impact of yet undiagnosed nr-axSpA and AS on patients’ work outcomes was substantial but was not significantly different from those of patients with long-standing CLBP. Variables significantly associated with reduced work productivity were VAS for pain and RMDQ score

Work outcome in yet undiagnosed patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis and ankylosing spondylitis; results of a cross-sectional study among patients with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND: To understand the impact of yet undiagnosed non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) on work outcomes in a cohort of patients with long-lasting chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Data were used from a primary care CLBP cohort that was established to understand the prevalence of nr-axSpA and AS. Clinical characteristics comprised measures of back pain (visual analogue scale), inflammation (C-reactive protein) and physical functioning (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)). Worker outcomes comprised a question on employment and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire, distinguishing absenteeism, presenteeism, and overall work impairment in those employed and activity impairment in all patients. For each disease subgroup, employment ratio compared to the general population was assessed by indirect standardization. Factors associated with work productivity were explored by zero inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression models. RESULTS: Patients with CLBP (n = 579) were included (41% male, mean age 36 years), of whom 71 (12%) were identified as having nr-axSpA and 24 (4%) as having AS. The standardized employment ratios were 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.94), 0.97 (95% CI 0.85-1.09) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.56-1.06) for patients with CLBP, nr-axSpA and AS, respectively. Scores for the WPAI subdomains were not significantly different between patients with CLBP, nr-axSpA or AS. The ZINB models showed significant associations between visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain and RMDQ and work productivity. CONCLUSION: The impact of yet undiagnosed nr-axSpA and AS on patients' work outcomes was substantial but was not significantly different from those of patients with long-standing CLBP. Variables significantly associated with reduced work productivity were VAS for pain and RMDQ score