Abstract
Abstract
Background
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with a high readmission rate and poses a significant disease burden. South Korea initiated pilot projects on transitional care services (TCS) to reduce readmissions. However, evidence from cost-effectiveness analyses remains undiscovered. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TCS in patients with COPD from the healthcare system’ perspective.
Method
A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov model containing six components of possible medical use after discharge. Transition probabilities and medical costs were extracted from the National Health Insurance Service Senior Cohort (NHIS-SC), and utility data were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results.
Results
Conducting TCS produced an incremental quality-adjusted life years gain of 0.231, 0.275, 0.296 for those in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively, and cost savings of $225.16, $1668, and $2251.64 for those in their 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively, per patient over a 10-year time horizon. The deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the TCS cost and the cost of readmission by other diseases immensely impact the results. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is below $23,050 was over 85%, 93%, and 97% for those in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, respectively.
Conclusions
TCS was the dominant option compared to usual care. However, it is advantageous to the healthcare budget preferentially consider patients aged over 70 years with severe TCS symptoms. In addition, it is essential to include the management of underlying comorbidities in TCS intervention.
Trial registration
Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0007937. Registered on 24 November 2022
Funder
the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference58 articles.
1. The Korean Tuberculosis and Respiratory Society. COPD clinical guide; 2018. (in Korean) [cited 2022.10.25]. Available from: https://www.lungkorea.org/bbs/skin/guide/download.php?code=guide&number=10635
2. Varmaghani M, Dehghani M, Heidari E, Sharifi F, Moghaddam SS, Farzadfar F. Global prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. East Mediterr Health J. 2019;25(1):47–57.
3. World Health Organization. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-disease-(copd). Accessed: 27 Sep 2023.
4. Cho KS. Current status of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Republic of Korea. Public Health Wkly Rep. 2021;14:943–51. (In Korean).
5. Brunner-La Rocca HP, Peden CJ, Soong J, Holman PA, Bogdanovskaya M, Barclay L. Reasons for readmission after hospital discharge in patients with chronic diseases—information from an international dataset. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(6):e0233457.