Economic evaluation of exercise interventions for individuals with cancer: A systematic review

Wang, Yufan; McCarthy, Alexandra; Hayes, Sandra C.; Gordon, Louisa; Chiu, Vivian; Bailey, Tom G.; Stewart, Elizabeth A.; Tuffaha, Haitham

doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107491

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the values allow comparison across studies and can indicate whether the change was meaningful to participants. When considering the cost per QALY as the primary outcome for economic evaluations, we found contradictory and inconclusive results, which are similar to findings in systematic reviews of economic analyses in exercise oncology [41][42][43]. Similar to these reviews, we noted variability in patient characteristics, time horizons, and exercise parameters of the included studies, which probably contributed to the mixed results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…A recent systematic review by Wang and colleagues found that five of six (83%) studies that used decision-analytic modelling to extrapolate long-term health effects of exercise (3 years to lifetime) were cost-effective, whereas only five of ten (50%) trial-based analyses were cost-effective. Time horizons for the trial-based analyses ranged from 9 to 16 months [43].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Generic Health Utility Measures in Exercise Oncology: A Scoping Review and Future Directions

Parkinson,

Ospina,

Round

et al. 2023

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the evidence that exercise is effective at mitigating common side effects in adults with cancer, it is rarely part of usual cancer care. One reason for this is the lack of economic evidence supporting the benefit of exercise. Economic evaluations often rely on the use of generic utility measures to assess cost effectiveness. This review identifies and synthesizes the literature on the use of generic utility measures used to evaluate exercise interventions for adults with cancer. A systematic search of the literature from January 2000 to February 2023 was conducted using four databases (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete). Exercise studies involving adults with any type of cancer that used a generic utility measure were eligible for inclusion. Of the 2780 citations retrieved, 10 articles were included in this review. Seven articles included economic evaluations, with varying results. Four studies reported on cost-effectiveness; however, detailed effectiveness data derived from the generic utility measure were often not reported. Generic utility measures help to compare baseline values of and changes in health utility weights across studies and to general population norms; however, to date, they are underutilized in exercise oncology studies. Consideration should be given to the identified research evidence, population, and methodological gaps.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generic Health Utility Measures in Exercise Oncology: A Scoping Review and Future Directions

Parkinson,

Ospina,

Round

et al. 2023

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of costs, cancer prevention through physical activity could lead to a reduction in treatment costs, as fewer costly treatments and hospitalizations are required [ 48 ]. In addition, it could reduce costs related to disability and loss of productivity due to the disease [ [49] , [50] , [51] ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Greater physical activity levels are associated with lower prevalence of tumors and risk of cancer in Spanish population: A cross-sectional study

Franco-García,

Castillo-Paredes,

Rodríguez-Redondo

et al. 2024

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, the qualitative aspect and intervention cost-effectiveness depend in great part upon the correct identi cation and prioritization of the necessary care [8-10], which may be limited by its scope and availability. At present, it is clear that the cost-effectiveness of the interventions, new treatment procedures, and healthcare quality must be accompanied by a cost-bene t analysis [10][11][12][13][14]. In this regard, a number of countries in Central and Eastern Europe are concerned by the quality and availability of the healthcare provided; however, little data is available on the economic aspects of palliative care [15,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits of outpatient palliative oncological care: A cost analysis of nutritional interventions.

Molnarova,

Maresova,

Rezny

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of palliative medicine is to achieve and maintain the best possible quality of life for patients and support their families, relatives, and friends. Therefore, we conducted a case-control observational retrospective study evaluating the economic burden of nutritional intervention during ambulatory palliative oncology care, aiming to implement the obtained data to the quality of healthcare. Methods A comparison of total expenses per patient was made between the three groups of patients, i.e., Group A – 256 patients with systematic nutritional intervention during 2020-22, Group B − 1393 patients treated during 2020-22, and Group C – 940 patients without systematic nutritional intervention during in 2017-19. The expense analysis was performed using mixed methods monitoring nutritional intervention, i.e. medical records, laboratory tests, and insurance bills from the palliative oncology clinic. The collected data included four categories (direct and indirect cost): nutritional supplements, other medical expenses, requested care, and other care. The qualitative costs and benefits analyses were done within the CBA method framework, i.e. online interviews of relevant stakeholders who were involved in the process of nutritional measures. Results The Mann–Whitney U-test showed significant (P < 0.001) differences between the tested groups, with the lowest median of total expenses in Group B (2,921 CZK) and the highest in Group A (16,692 CZK), demonstrating a significant reduction in total expenses. The same was observed in the comparison between Group C (4,923 CZK) and Group B (2,921 CZK) during 2020-22. Conclusion The present study proves that nutritional intervention, and the related modifications in palliative treatment, benefit the patients and reduce the overall costs of healthcare.

show abstract

Economic evaluation of exercise interventions for individuals with cancer: A systematic review

Cited by 7 publications

References 44 publications

Generic Health Utility Measures in Exercise Oncology: A Scoping Review and Future Directions

Generic Health Utility Measures in Exercise Oncology: A Scoping Review and Future Directions

Greater physical activity levels are associated with lower prevalence of tumors and risk of cancer in Spanish population: A cross-sectional study

Limits of outpatient palliative oncological care: A cost analysis of nutritional interventions.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About