Value of Nonpharmacological Interventions for People With an Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations.

Value Health

Trinity College Institute for Neuroscience, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA; School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Published: October 2022

AI Article Synopsis

  • Acquired brain injury (ABI) has lasting impacts requiring ongoing care and support, making nonpharmacological rehabilitation increasingly important for decision-making in healthcare.
  • A systematic review evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for ABI by analyzing 41 relevant studies published until 2021, revealing varied methodologies and conclusions about cost savings.
  • Results indicated that multidisciplinary approaches and certain therapies were more cost-effective than standard care, but overall evidence on cost-effectiveness remains limited, highlighting the need for further research in this area.

Article Abstract

Objectives: Acquired brain injury (ABI) has long-lasting effects, and patients and their families require continued care and support, often for the rest of their lives. For many individuals living with an ABI disorder, nonpharmacological rehabilitation treatment care has become increasingly important care component and relevant for informed healthcare decision making. Our study aimed to appraise economic evidence on the cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for individuals living with an ABI.

Methods: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020187469), and a protocol article was subject to peer review. Searches were conducted across several databases for articles published from inception to 2021. Study quality was assessed according the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist and Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes criteria.

Results: Of the 3772 articles reviewed 41 publications met the inclusion criteria. There was a considerable heterogeneity in methodological approaches, target populations, study time frames, and perspectives and comparators used. Keeping these issues in mind, we find that 4 multidisciplinary interventions studies concluded that fast-track specialized services were cheaper and more cost-effective than usual care, with cost savings ranging from £253 to £6063. In 3 neuropsychological studies, findings suggested that meditated therapy was more effective and saved money than usual care. In 4 early supported discharge studies, interventions were dominant over usual care, with cost savings ranging from £142 to £1760.

Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness evidence of different nonpharmacological rehabilitation treatments is scant. More robust evidence is needed to determine the value of these and other interventions across the ABI care pathway.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.014DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

usual care
12
nonpharmacological interventions
8
acquired brain
8
brain injury
8
systematic review
8
individuals living
8
nonpharmacological rehabilitation
8
care cost
8
cost savings
8
savings ranging
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!