These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cost-utility analysis of a three-month exercise programme vs usual care following multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.
    Author: Henchoz Y, Pinget C, Wasserfallen JB, Paillex R, de Goumoëns P, Norberg M, Kai-Lik So A.
    Journal: J Rehabil Med; 2010 Oct; 42(9):846-52. PubMed ID: 20878045.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-utility of an exercise programme vs usual care after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: A total of 105 patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: Chronic low back pain patients completing a 3-week functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation were randomized to either a 3-month exercise programme (n = 56) or usual care (n = 49). The exercise programme consisted of 24 training sessions during 12 weeks. At the end of functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation and at 1-year follow-up quality of life was measured with the SF-36 questionnaire, converted into utilities and transformed into quality--adjusted life years. Direct and indirect monthly costs were measured using cost diaries. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the incremental cost of the exercise programme divided by the difference in quality-adjusted life years between both groups. RESULTS: Quality of life improved significantly at 1-year follow-up in both groups. Similarly, both groups significantly reduced total monthly costs over time. No significant difference was observed between groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 79,270 euros. CONCLUSION: Adding an exercise programme after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation compared with usual care does not offer significant long-term benefits in quality of life and direct and indirect costs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]