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
. 2015 May 5;10(5):e0121340.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121340. eCollection 2015.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Specialist Geriatric Medical Intervention for Frail Older People Discharged from Acute Medical Units: Economic Evaluation in a Two-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial (AMIGOS)

Lukasz Tanajewski  1 , Matthew Franklin  1 , Georgios Gkountouras  1 , Vladislav Berdunov  1 , Judi Edmans  2 , Simon Conroy  3 , Lucy E Bradshaw  2 , John R F Gladman  2 , Rachel A Elliott  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-Effectiveness of a Specialist Geriatric Medical Intervention for Frail Older People Discharged from Acute Medical Units: Economic Evaluation in a Two-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial (AMIGOS)

Lukasz Tanajewski et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Poor outcomes and high resource-use are observed for frail older people discharged from acute medical units. A specialist geriatric medical intervention, to facilitate Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, was developed to reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes and associated high resource-use in this group in the post-discharge period.

Objective: To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of a specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people in the 90 days following discharge from an acute medical unit, compared with standard care.

Methods: Economic evaluation was conducted alongside a two-centre randomised controlled trial (AMIGOS). 433 patients (aged 70 or over) at risk of future health problems, discharged from acute medical units within 72 hours of attending hospital, were recruited in two general hospitals in Nottingham and Leicester, UK. Participants were randomised to the intervention, comprising geriatrician assessment in acute units and further specialist management, or to control where patients received no additional intervention over and above standard care. Primary outcome was incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

Results: We undertook cost-effectiveness analysis for 417 patients (intervention: 205). The difference in mean adjusted QALYs gained between groups at 3 months was -0.001 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.009, 0.007). Total adjusted secondary and social care costs, including direct costs of the intervention, at 3 months were £4412 (€5624, $6878) and £4110 (€5239, $6408) for the intervention and standard care groups, the incremental cost was £302 (95% CI: 193, 410) [€385, $471]. The intervention was dominated by standard care with probability of 62%, and with 0% probability of cost-effectiveness (at £20,000/QALY threshold).

Conclusions: The specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people discharged from acute medical unit was not cost-effective. Further research on designing effective and cost-effective specialist service for frail older people discharged from acute medical units is needed.

Trial registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN21800480 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21800480.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (adjusted analyses, full sample).
Full-sample CEAC is obtained from probability of cost-effectiveness for given WTP, averaged across 45 imputations.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Cost-effectiveness plane—pairwise bootstrapping (adjusted analysis, complete-case sample).
Fig 3
Fig 3. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (subgroups and overall, net-benefit regression approach).
CEACs obtained from p-values, p, for intervention coefficient in net-benefit regressions for WTP≥£4,000 (for which Prob(>F)<0.05). In the case of negative coefficient, probability of cost-effectiveness is equal to p/2, in the case of positive, 1—p/2. Regression models analogical to those presented in Table 5, £1000-intervals for subsequent WTP applied. Due to model specification tests failed for WTP<£15,000, CEACs for care home subgroups are presented starting from WTP = £15,000.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. St Noble VJ, Davies G, Bell D. Improving continuity of care in an acute medical unit: initial outcomes. QJM. 2008. Jul;101(7):529–33. Epub 2008/04/18. eng. 10.1093/qjmed/hcn042 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Woodard J, Gladman J, Conroy S. Frail older people at the interface. Age Ageing. 2010;39(S1):i36.
    1. Ferguson C, Woodard J, Banerjee J, Conroy S. Operationalising frailty definitions in the emergency department-a mapping exercise. The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Ageing. 2009;13(Supplement 1):S266.
    1. Edmans J, Bradshaw L, Gladman JR, Franklin M, Berdunov V, Elliott R, et al. The Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) score to predict clinical outcomes and health service costs in older people discharged from UK acute medical units. Age Ageing. 2013. Nov;42(6):747–53. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3809718. Epub 2013/05/15. eng. 10.1093/ageing/aft054 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Woodard J, Rowell G, Vartha R, Whittingham C, Vadher N, Conroy S. Appropriate prescribing in older people. J Nutr Health Aging. 2009;13(suppl 1):S477.

Publication types