Article Text

Download PDFPDF

184 Cost-effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation: a systematic review
Free
  1. Baldev Chahal,
  2. Deokhee Yi,
  3. Natasha Lovell and
  4. Irene J Higginson
  1. King’s College London

Abstract

Background Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a complex intervention aimed at decreasing morbidity in patients with long-term lung conditions such as COPD, bronchiectasis and pulmonary fibrosis. In the NHS setting, it is an 8 week programme consisting of exercise training to reduce functional decline, and education to aid patients with self-management of their condition. Extensive evidence exists in support of the clinical effectiveness of PR but there is a paucity of studies evaluating the economics of PR. This review aimed to evaluate cost-effectiveness studies of PR programmes worldwide.

Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A thorough literature search strategy was employed across PubMed, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (CEA Registry), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and Google Scholar from inception to October 2019 for studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of PR programmes with that of usual care. Included studies had to meet the Cochrane definition of PR; at minimum, exercise training for at least 4 weeks. Cost-effectiveness measures included cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), cost per clinically significant outcome, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and/or cost savings to the healthcare system involved. These findings were then narratively synthesised.

Results 8 studies consisting of 1437 patients were included. Settings for the PR programmes were UK, Ireland, France, Netherlands, Canada and Australia. 7 studies included COPD patients only. 1 study assessing the uncertainties around the cost and outcome found that the cost per QALY was below £17000, below the willingness to pay threshold suggested by the NICE. Evidence from the studies suggests that PR is cost-effective with savings for the healthcare provider involved.

Conclusion PR is a cost-effective intervention with potential savings for the service providers. Future studies should examine whether cost-effectiveness varies with the age of patients undergoing PR.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.