• Nada Andelic, Jiajia Ye, Sveinung Tornas, Cecilie Roe, Juan Lu, Erik Bautz-Holter, Tron Moger, Solrun Sigurdardottir, Anne-Kristine Schanke, and Eline Aas.
• 1 Institute of Health and Society, Research Centre for Habilitation and Rehabilitation Models and Services (CHARM), Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo , Oslo, Norway .
• J. Neurotrauma. 2014 Jul 15;31(14):1313-20.

AbstractThe aim of this study is to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of two different rehabilitation trajectories after severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). A decision tree model compared hospitalization costs, health effects, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of a continuous chain versus a broken chain of rehabilitation. The expected costs were estimated by the reimbursement system using diagnosis-related group and based on point estimates of the Disability Rating Scale (DRS); the health effects were measured by means of area under the curve (AUC). The incremental health benefit was estimated as the difference in the AUCs between the chains. Lower values on the DRS scale indicate better health; thus, smaller AUCs were preferred. The modeled population was a cohort of 59 patients with sTBI (30 in continuous chain; 29 in broken chain) with 6-weeks, 1-year, and 5-year post-injury follow-ups. Regarding the DRS estimates, 5-year AUCs were 19.40 (continuous chain) and 23.46 (broken chain). Across 5 years, the continuous chain of rehabilitation had lower costs and better health effects. By replacing the broken chain with the continuous chain, NOK 37.000 could be saved and 4.06 DRS points gained. By means of probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the majority of ICER estimates (67% of the Monte Carlo simulations) indicated that a continuous chain of rehabilitation was less costly and more effective. These findings indicate that the trajectory of continuous rehabilitation represents a dominant strategy in that it reduces costs and improves outcomes after sTBI under reasonable assumptions.

31 keywords...

hide…