• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis of home-based rehabilitation compared to usual care for people with inoperable lung cancer

    Author(s)
    Edbrooke, Lara
    Denehy, Linda
    Patrick, Cameron
    Tuffaha, Haitham
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Tuffaha, Haitham W.
    Year published
    2021
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Objective: Few economic evaluations of lung cancer rehabilitation exist. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of providing home-based rehabilitation for inoperable lung cancer. Methods: A cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of rehabilitation compared with usual care. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER (95% CI)] and the net monetary benefit are reported. Value of information (VOI) analysis assessed the need/value of more research. Results: Seventy participants (34 intervention and 36 usual ...
    View more >
    Objective: Few economic evaluations of lung cancer rehabilitation exist. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of providing home-based rehabilitation for inoperable lung cancer. Methods: A cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of rehabilitation compared with usual care. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER (95% CI)] and the net monetary benefit are reported. Value of information (VOI) analysis assessed the need/value of more research. Results: Seventy participants (34 intervention and 36 usual care), average (SD) age 63.0 (12.0) years, 32 (45.7%) stage IV. The average intervention cost was AU$3421 (AU$5352 usual care), and effect (QALY) was 0.30 (0.31 usual care). The ICER was AU$228,197 (−1,173,194 to 1,101,450) per QALY gained. The net monetary benefit was AU$1508, favouring the intervention. The probability that the intervention was more cost-effective than usual care, at a willingness to pay threshold of AU$50,000, was 75%. VOI analysis showed that additional research to resolve decision uncertainty is potentially worthwhile. Conclusion: A high degree of uncertainty exists regarding the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer rehabilitation. Further RCTs, powered for economic evaluations and utilising rehabilitation sensitive outcomes, are required to support translation of evidence into clinical practice.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    European Journal of Cancer Care
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13501
    Note
    This publication has been entered in Griffith Research Online as an advanced online version.
    Subject
    Oncology and carcinogenesis
    Nursing
    Public health
    Health economics
    Science & Technology
    Life Sciences & Biomedicine
    Health Care Sciences & Services
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/408412
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander