Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 Oct;25(5):575-81.
doi: 10.1007/s40520-013-0128-4. Epub 2013 Aug 15.

Effects of preventive home visits on health care costs for ambulatory frail elders: a randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of preventive home visits on health care costs for ambulatory frail elders: a randomized controlled trial

Ayumi Kono et al. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2013 Oct.

Abstract

Background and aims: Reducing health care costs through preventive geriatric care has become a high priority in Japan. We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial to examine the effects of a preventive home visit program on health care costs among ambulatory frail elders.

Methods: Structured preventive home visits by nurses or care managers were provided to the visit group every 6 months over 2 years. The enrolled participants (N = 323) were randomly assigned to either the visit group (N = 161) or the control group (N = 162). We analyzed the health care costs, including the costs for hospitalizations and outpatient clinic utilization for participants who had health care insurance from the local government (N = 307). The visit group included 154 individuals in the visit group and 153 people in the control group.

Results: Total health care costs over the study period were not significantly different between groups, but at most monthly time points costs and those for outpatient clinic utilization in the visit group were lower than those in the control group. Hospitalizations, which accounted for more than ¥ 500,000 JPY per month, were less likely to occur more often among participants in the visit group (N = 71) than in the control group (N = 113) (OR = 0.63; p = 0.002).

Conclusions: These results suggest that a preventive home visit program may reduce monthly health care costs, primarily by reducing hospitalization costs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Monthly total health care costs of the groups during the study period (the visit group N = 154; the control group N = 153). (a) Numbers are raw data. (b) The yearly TTS average for 2008 was 1 USD = 104.5 JPY; this average for 2009 was 1 USD = 94.6 JPY. (c) A t test showed significant differences of each health care cost between groups using log-transformed values at 3M (p = 0.03), 11M (p = 0.005), 12M (p = 0.046), 13M (p = 0.01) and 17M (p = 0.049)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Monthly health care costs for outpatient clinic utilization of the groups during the study period (the visit group N = 154; the control group N = 153). (a) Numbers are raw data. (b) The yearly TTS average for 2008 was 1 USD = 104.5 JPY; this average for 2009 was 1 USD = 94.6 JPY. (c) A t test showed significant differences of each health care cost between groups using log-transformed values at 1M (p = 0.01), 6M (p = 0.01), 7M (p = 0.04), 8M (p = 0.008), 11M (p = 0.02), 12M (p = 0.02), 21M (p = 0.01) and 23M (p = 0.048)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Distribution of monthly hospital care costs of the groups during the study period (N = 307). (a) The yearly TTS average for 2008 was 1 USD = 104.5 JPY; this average for 2009 was 1 USD = 94.6 JPY. (b) The number of participants who were hospitalized in the visit group were ordered from 1 to 24 months; N = 14, 13, 6, 10, 15, 14, 15, 11, 11, 7, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 10, 8, 7, 9, 10, 13, 11, 13. (c) The number of participants who were hospitalized in the control group were ordered from 1 to 24 months; N = 6, 10, 9, 9, 14, 7, 10, 5, 9, 10, 11, 9, 10, 13, 9, 11, 14, 9, 6, 9, 10, 10, 6, 10. (d) Hospitalizations that accounted for more than 500,000 JPY: the visit vs. control group (N = 71 vs. N = 113); OR = 0.63, p = 0.002

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. van Haastregt JC, Diederiks JP, van Rossum E, de Witte LP, Crebolder HF. Effects of preventive home visits to elderly people living in the community: systematic review. BMJ. 2000;320:754–758. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.754. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bouman A, van Rossum E, Nelemans P, Kempen GI, Knipschild P. Effects of intensive home visiting programs for older people with poor health status: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:74. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-74. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stuck AE, Egger M, Hammer A, Minder CE, Beck JC. Home visits to prevent nursing home admission and functional decline in elderly people: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. JAMA. 2002;287:1022–1028. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.8.1022. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Huss A, Stuck AE, Rubenstein LZ, Egger M, Clough-Gorr KM. Multidimensional preventive home visit programs for community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63:298–307. doi: 10.1093/gerona/63.3.298. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Beswick AD, Rees K, Dieppe P, et al. Complex interventions to improve physical function and maintain independent living in elderly people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2008;371:725–735. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60342-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources