Cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review

Gemma E Shields, Adrian Wells, Patrick Doherty, Anthony Heagerty, Deborah Buck, Linda M Davies, Gemma E Shields, Adrian Wells, Patrick Doherty, Anthony Heagerty, Deborah Buck, Linda M Davies

Abstract

Patients may be offered cardiac rehabilitation (CR), a supervised programme often including exercises, education and psychological care, following a cardiac event, with the aim of reducing morbidity and mortality. Cost-constrained healthcare systems require information about the best use of budget and resources to maximise patient benefit. We aimed to systematically review and critically appraise economic studies of CR and its components. In January 2016, validated electronic searches of the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Embase databases were run to identify full economic evaluations published since 2001. Two levels of screening were used and explicit inclusion criteria were applied. Prespecified data extraction and critical appraisal were performed using the NHS EED handbook and Drummond checklist. The majority of studies concluded that CR was cost-effective versus no CR (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from $1065 to $71 755 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)). Evidence for specific interventions within CR was varied; psychological intervention ranged from dominant (cost saving and more effective) to $226 128 per QALY, telehealth ranged from dominant to $588 734 per QALY and while exercise was cost-effective across all relevant studies, results were subject to uncertainty. Key drivers of cost-effectiveness were risk of subsequent events and hospitalisation, hospitalisation and intervention costs, and utilities. This systematic review of studies evaluates the cost-effectiveness of CR in the modern era, providing a fresh evidence base for policy-makers. Evidence suggests that CR is cost-effective, especially with exercise as a component. However, research is needed to determine the most cost-effective design of CR.

Keywords: cardiac rehabilitation; health care economics; systemic review.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of search results.

References

    1. GBD 2015 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 2016;388:1545–602. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31678-6
    1. British Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. The six core components for cardiovascular disease prevention and rehabilitation. 2017. (accessed 26 Nov 2017).
    1. Dalal HM, Doherty P, Taylor RS. Cardiac rehabilitation. BMJ 2015;351:h5000 10.1136/bmj.h5000
    1. British Heart Foundation. The national audit of cardiac rehabilitation annual statistical report. 2016. (accessed 7 Apr 2017).
    1. NHS England. A resource to support commissioners in setting a level of ambition on reducing premature mortality prepared by medical directorate, NHS england factsheet: increase uptake of cardiac rehabilitation for people with coronary artery disease and following acut. 2014. (accessed 22 Jul 2017).
    1. Wong WP, Feng J, Pwee KH, et al. . A systematic review of economic evaluations of cardiac rehabilitation. BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:243 10.1186/1472-6963-12-243
    1. Papadakis S, Oldridge NB, Coyle D, et al. . Economic evaluation of cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2005;12:513–20.
    1. Oldridge NB, Pakosh MT, Thomas RJ. Cardiac rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries: a review on cost and cost-effectiveness. Int Health 2016;8:77–82. 10.1093/inthealth/ihv047
    1. Rauch B, Davos CH, Doherty P, et al. . The prognostic effect of cardiac rehabilitation in the era of acute revascularisation and statin therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized studies - The Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS). Eur J Prev Cardiol 2016;23:1914–39. 10.1177/2047487316671181
    1. Anderson L, Taylor RS. Cardiac rehabilitation for people with heart disease: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2014.
    1. Centre for reviews and dissemination. 2014. (accessed 21 Jul 2016).
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network cardiac rehabilitation. (accessed 5 Nov 2017).
    1. Taylor RS, Dalal H, Jolly K, et al. . Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2015.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Chronic heart failure in adults: management | Guidance and guidelines | NICE. 2010. (accessed 9 Mar 2017).
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Myocardial infarction: cardiac rehabilitation and prevention of further cardiovascular disease. 2013. (accessed 26 Nov 2017).
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Unstable angina and NSTEMI: early management. 2013. (accessed 26 Nov 2017).
    1. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ economic evaluation working party. BMJ 1996;313:275.
    1. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) handbook. 2007. (accessed 18 Dec 2015).
    1. OECD. Prices - Inflation (CPI) - OECD data. 2015. (accessed 18 Dec 2015).
    1. OECD. Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs) data. 2015. (accessed 18 Dec 2015).
    1. Georgiou D, Chen Y, Appadoo S, et al. . Cost-effectiveness analysis of long-term moderate exercise training in chronic heart failure. Am J Cardiol 2001;87:984–8. 10.1016/S0002-9149(01)01434-5
    1. Huang Y, Zhang R, Culler SD, et al. . Costs and effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation for dialysis patients following coronary bypass. Kidney Int 2008;74:1079–84. 10.1038/ki.2008.381
    1. Oldridge N, Furlong W, Perkins A, et al. . Community or patient preferences for cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation: does it matter? Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2008;15:608–15. 10.1097/HJR.0b013e328304fec1
    1. Reed SD, Whellan DJ, Li Y, et al. . Economic evaluation of the HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training) randomized controlled trial: an exercise training study of patients with chronic heart failure. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010;3:374–81. 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.907287
    1. Maddison R, Pfaeffli L, Whittaker R, et al. . A mobile phone intervention increases physical activity in people with cardiovascular disease: Results from the HEART randomized controlled trial. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2015;22:701–9. 10.1177/2047487314535076
    1. Kidholm K, Rasmussen MK, Andreasen JJ, et al. . Cost-utility analysis of a cardiac telerehabilitation program: the teledialog project. Telemed J E Health 2016;22:553–63. 10.1089/tmj.2015.0194
    1. Taylor RS, Watt A, Dalal HM, et al. . Home-based cardiac rehabilitation versus hospital-based rehabilitation: a cost effectiveness analysis. Int J Cardiol 2007;119:196–201. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.07.218
    1. Schweikert B, Hahmann H, Steinacker JM, et al. . Intervention study shows outpatient cardiac rehabilitation to be economically at least as attractive as inpatient rehabilitation. Clin Res Cardiol 2009;98:787–95. 10.1007/s00392-009-0081-6
    1. Dehbarez NT, Lynggaard V, May O, et al. . Learning and coping strategies versus standard education in cardiac rehabilitation: a cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res 2015;15:422 10.1186/s12913-015-1072-0
    1. Briffa TG, Eckermann SD, Griffiths AD, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation after an acute coronary event: a randomised controlled trial. Med J Aust 2005;183:450.
    1. Yu CM, Lau CP, Chau J, et al. . A short course of cardiac rehabilitation program is highly cost effective in improving long-term quality of life in patients with recent myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1915–22.
    1. Frederix I, Hansen D, Coninx K, et al. . Effect of comprehensive cardiac telerehabilitation on one-year cardiovascular rehospitalization rate, medical costs and quality of life: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2016;23:674–82. 10.1177/2047487315602257
    1. Papadakis S, Reid RD, Coyle D, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation program delivery models in patients at varying cardiac risk, reason for referral, and sex. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2008;15:347–53. 10.1097/HJR.0b013e3282f5ffab
    1. Leggett LE, Hauer T, Martin B-J, et al. . Optimizing value from cardiac rehabilitation. Mayo Clin Proc 2015;90:1011–20. 10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.05.015
    1. Rincón M, Rojas MX, Rodriguez Romero VA, et al. . Economic evaluation of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programs for chronic heart failure patients in Colombia. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev 2016;36:12–19. 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000150
    1. De Gruyter E, Ford G, Stavreski B. Economic and social impact of increasing uptake of cardiac rehabilitation servicesa cost benefit analysis. Heart Lung Circ 2016;25:175–83. 10.1016/j.hlc.2015.08.007
    1. Kühr EM, Ribeiro RA, Rohde LEP, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of supervised exercise therapy in heart failure patients. Value in Health 2011;14:S100–S107. 10.1016/j.jval.2011.05.006
    1. Cheng Q, Church J, Haas M, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of a population-based lifestyle intervention to promote healthy weight and physical activity in non-attenders of cardiac rehabilitation. Heart Lung Circ 2016;25:265–74. 10.1016/j.hlc.2015.07.002
    1. Reed C, Monz BU, Perahia DG, et al. . Quality of life outcomes among patients with depression after 6 months of starting treatment: results from FINDER. J Affect Disord 2009;113:296–302. 10.1016/j.jad.2008.05.021
    1. Lewin RJ, Coulton S, Frizelle DJ, et al. . A brief cognitive behavioural preimplantation and rehabilitation programme for patients receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator improves physical health and reduces psychological morbidity and unplanned readmissions. Heart 2009;95:63–9. 10.1136/hrt.2007.129890
    1. Boutron I, Tubach F, Giraudeau B, et al. . Blinding was judged more difficult to achieve and maintain in nonpharmacologic than pharmacologic trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:543–50. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.010
    1. Dyer MT, Goldsmith KA, Sharples LS, et al. . A review of health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cardiovascular disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010;8:13 10.1186/1477-7525-8-13
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. 2013. (accessed 10 Feb 2016).
    1. Arnold D, Girling A, Stevens A, et al. . Comparison of direct and indirect methods of estimating health state utilities for resource allocation: review and empirical analysis. BMJ 2009;339:b2688 10.1136/bmj.b2688
    1. Shiroiwa T, Sung YK, Fukuda T, et al. . International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ 2010;19:422–37. 10.1002/hec.1481
    1. Grustam AS, Severens JL, van Nijnatten J, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions for chronic heart failure patients: a literature review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2014;30:59–68. 10.1017/S0266462313000779
    1. Udsen FW, Hejlesen O, Ehlers LH. A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Telemed Telecare 2014;20:212–20. 10.1177/1357633X14533896
    1. de la Torre-Díez I, López-Coronado M, Vaca C, et al. . Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness studies of telemedicine, electronic, and mobile health systems in the literature: a systematic review. Telemed J E Health 2015;21:81–5. 10.1089/tmj.2014.0053
    1. Bell CM, Urbach DR, Ray JG, et al. . Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: systematic review. BMJ 2006;332:699–703. 10.1136/bmj.38737.607558.80
    1. Fuster V. Global burden of cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:520–2. 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.06.1151
    1. Das P, Naylor C, Majeed A, et al. . Bringing together physical and mental health within primary care: a new frontier for integrated care. J R Soc Med 2016;109:364–6. 10.1177/0141076816665270

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する