Cost-effectiveness of a non-pharmacological treatment vs. “care as usual” in day care centers for community-dwelling older people with cognitive impairment: results from the German randomized controlled DeTaMAKS-trial

Steinbeißer, Kathrin; Schwarzkopf, Larissa; Graessel, Elmar; Seidl, Hildegard

doi:10.1007/s10198-020-01175-y

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 75 publications

(137 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another community-based study ( 4 ) found that 30% of Chinese older adults aged over 80 years suffered from cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment could result in negative consequences, including reduced quality of life (QOL), impaired functional outcomes and increased health care burden ( 5 , 6 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Impairment and Its Associated Factors in Older Adults Living in High and Low Altitude Areas: A Comparative Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCognitive impairment is a major health concern in older adults. Few studies have examined the association between environmental factors and cognitive impairment, especially in high altitude areas. In this study, the prevalence of cognitive impairment in older adults living in high altitude was compared with those living in low altitude areas.MethodsThis was a comparative study conducted at Qinghai (high altitude group), and Guangzhou (low altitude group), China. Cognition, depressive symptoms and quality of life (QOL) were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and WHO Quality of Life brief version–WHOQOL-BREF, respectively.ResultsAltogether, 644 older adults (207 in Qinghai and 437 in Guangzhou) completed the assessment. The prevalence rate of cognitive impairment was 94.7% (95% CI: 91.6–97.7%) in older adults living in the high altitude area, while the corresponding figure was 89.2% (95% CI: 86.3–92.1%) in the low altitude area. After controlling for covariates, the high altitude group appeared more likely to have cognitive impairment (OR = 2.92, 95% CI: 1.23–6.91, P = 0.015) compared with the low altitude group. Within the high altitude group sample, multinomial logistic regression analysis revealed that older age (aged 74 and above) was significantly associated with higher risk of severe cognitive impairment (OR = 3.58, 95%CI: 1.44–8.93, P = 0.006), while higher education level (secondary school and above) was associated with decreased risk of moderate cognitive impairment (OR = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.22–0.85, P = 0.006). Within the high altitude group, QOL did not differ significantly between normal/mild, moderate and severe cognitive impairment subgroups across physical [F(1, 207) = 1.83, P = 0.163], psychological [F(1, 207) = 1.50, P = 0.225], social [F(1,207) = 2.22, P = 0.111] and environmental domains [F(1,207) = 0.49, P = 0.614].ConclusionThis study found that cognitive impairment was more common among older adults living in the high altitude area. Regular screening and appropriate interventions should be provided to older adults in need.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Impairment and Its Associated Factors in Older Adults Living in High and Low Altitude Areas: A Comparative Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The administrative data of social and health care service use and the costs of the intervention will be utilized in examining the cost-effectiveness of the intervention [ 34 ]. Costs of the day activity service will be retrieved from the service providers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study protocol of a mixed method pragmatic quasi-experimental trial to evaluate the day activity services targeted at older home care clients in Finland

Ristolainen

Forma²,

Hawkins³

et al. 2022

BMC Geriatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In Finland, the ‘day activity service’ is targeted at older home care clients who are unable to participate in other available activities due to poor health or functional disabilities. The aim of the day activity service is to support home care client’s ability to live at home and to enhance their wellbeing and social inclusion. This mixed method study examines the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and process of the day activity service. Methods The target sample size is 200 participants. The intervention group (n = 100) is composed of home care clients who begin to participate in the day activity service. The comparison group (n = 100) are home care clients who do not participate in the day activity service, and whose functioning and care needs are similar to the participants of the intervention group. The primary outcome is social inclusion (ESIS-scale). Secondary outcomes are loneliness (single item and De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale) and social care related quality of life (ASCOT). Baseline, three-month and six-month follow-up surveys are gathered from intervention and comparison group participants in order to compare outcomes between groups pre- and post-intervention. Costs of health and social services, based on administrative data, and the costs of the intervention are utilized in examining the cost-effectiveness of the intervention with the above-described measurements. Qualitative data are collected by interviewing the intervention participants (n = 10) and professionals working at the day activity centres and older people’s services (4 focus groups) to explore the perceived outcomes and process of the intervention to find out how and why the intervention is effective or ineffective. Discussion The study seeks to produce a comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation process of the day activity service. Trial registration ISRCTN13146087, Registration date 03/04/2022.

show abstract

“…Example of Item 12: Measurement of outcomes 101,102 "We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) alongside the cluster-randomized, controlled, multicenter, prospective DeTaMAKS-trial ..Further details on the recruitment strategy of DCCs and the eligibility criteria of DCCs and participants are described in detail elsewhere.The trial's registration number is ISRCTN16412551. The effect of MAKS on cognitive abilities was operationalized by the Mini Example of Item 13: Valuation of outcomes 116,117 "Under this approach, the health outcome in conventional costutility analyses, namely QALY, was monetised using individual WTP for an additional QALY gained.…”

Section: Explanation Analyses Based On Preference-based Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces the previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, and the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as healthcare, public health, education, and social care). This Explanation and Elaboration Report presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist with recommendations and explanation and examples for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer-reviewed journals and the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. Nevertheless, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, given that there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.

show abstract

Cost-effectiveness of a non-pharmacological treatment vs. “care as usual” in day care centers for community-dwelling older people with cognitive impairment: results from the German randomized controlled DeTaMAKS-trial

Cited by 20 publications

References 75 publications

Cognitive Impairment and Its Associated Factors in Older Adults Living in High and Low Altitude Areas: A Comparative Study

Cognitive Impairment and Its Associated Factors in Older Adults Living in High and Low Altitude Areas: A Comparative Study

Study protocol of a mixed method pragmatic quasi-experimental trial to evaluate the day activity services targeted at older home care clients in Finland

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About