Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To determine if self-management programs, supported by a health professional, in rehabilitation are cost effective.
Data Sources: Six databases were searched until December 2023.
Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials with adults completing a supported self-management program while participating in rehabilitation or receiving health professional input in the hospital or community settings were included. Self-management programs were completed outside the structured, supervised therapy and health professional sessions. Included trials had a cost measure and an effectiveness outcome reported, such as health-related quality of life or function. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations was used to determine the certainty of evidence across trials included in each meta-analysis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated based on the mean difference from the meta-analyses of contributing health care costs and quality of life.
Data Extraction: After application of the search strategy, two independent reviewers determined eligibility of identified literature, initially by reviewing the title and/or abstract before full-text review. Using a customized form, data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer.
Data Synthesis: Forty-three trials were included, and 27 had data included in meta-analyses. Where self-management was a primary intervention, there was moderate certainty of a meaningful positive difference in quality-of-life utility index of 0.03 units (95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.06). The cost difference between self-management as the primary intervention and usual care (comprising usual intervention/therapy, minimal intervention [including education only], or no intervention) potentially favored the comparison group (mean difference=Australian dollar [AUD]90; 95% confidence interval, -AUD130 to AUD310). The cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for self-management programs as a stand-alone intervention was AUD3000, which was below the acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold in Australia per QALY gained (AUD50,000/QALY gained).
Conclusions: Self-management as an intervention is low cost and could improve health-related quality of life.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.05.007 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!