Test-retest reliability of the Cost for Patients Questionnaire.

Objectives: To investigate the test-retest reliability of the Costs for Patients Questionnaire (CoPaQ).

Methods: Through an online survey, individuals were invited to participate in a two-step study to assess the test-retest reliability of the CoPaQ. Participants to the first step were invited to complete the questionnaire a second time 2 weeks after.

Attributes Underlying Patient Choice for Telerehabilitation Treatment: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review to Support a Discrete Choice Experiment Study Design.

Background: Across most healthcare systems, patients are the primary focus. Patient involvements enhance their adherence to treatment, which in return, influences their health. The objective of this study was to determine the characteristics (ie, attributes) and associated levels (ie, values of the characteristics) that are the most important for patients regarding telerehabilitation (TR) healthcare to support a future discrete choice experiment (DCE) study design.

Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Health-Related Out-of-Pocket Costs: The Cost for Patients Questionnaire.

Objective: The growth of healthcare spending is a major concern for insurers and governments but also for patients whose health problems may result in costs going beyond direct medical costs. To develop a comprehensive tool to measure direct and indirect costs of a health condition for patients and their families to various outpatient contexts.

Methods: We conducted a content and face validation including results of a systematic review to identify the items related to direct and indirect costs for patients or their families and an online Delphi to determine the cost items to retain.

Validated Tools to Measure Costs for Patients: A Systematic Review.

Background: Increasing healthcare expenditures is a major concern to insurers and governments, but also to patients who must pay a greater proportion of their healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to identify validated tools for measuring the costs of a health condition for patients as well as the different elements to be considered when measuring costs from the patient's perspective.

Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted from 1984 to December 2020.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent: Systematic review and cost-benefit analysis.

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DESs) were considered as ground-breaking technology promising to eradicate restenosis and the necessity to perform multiple revascularization procedures subsequent to percutaneous coronary intervention. Soon after DESs were released on the market, however, there were reports of a potential increase in mortality and of early or late thrombosis. In addition, DESs are far more expensive than bare-metal stents (BMSs), which has led to their limited use in many countries.