Cost-benefit analysis of stroke rehabilitation in Iran

被引:1
|
作者
Darvishi, Ali [1 ]
Mousavi, Mirtaher [2 ]
Dezfouli, Ramin Abdi [1 ]
Shirazikhah, Marzieh [3 ]
Zarei, Mehdi Alizadeh [4 ]
Hendi, Hamidreza [5 ]
Joghataei, Faezeh [5 ]
Daroudi, Rajabali [6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Endocrinol & Metab Populat Sci Inst, Chron Dis Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[2] Univ Social Welf & Rehabil Sci, Social Welf Management Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[3] Univ Social Welf & Rehabil Sci, Social Determinants Hlth Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[4] Iran Univ Med Sci, Sch Rehabil Sci, Dept Occupat Therapy, Tehran, Iran
[5] Univ Social Welf & Rehabil Sci, Dept Social Welf Management, Tehran, Iran
[6] Natl Ctr Hlth Insurance Res, Tehran, Iran
[7] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Management Policy & Econ, Tehran, Iran
[8] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Management Policy & Econ, Enqelab Sq, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Cost-benefit; Economic evaluation; Rehabilitation; Stroke; Cost; CARE; STRATEGIES; UNITS;
D O I
10.1080/14737167.2023.2200938
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The economic evaluation of medication interventions for stroke has been the subject of much economic research. This study aimed to examine the cost-benefit of multidisciplinary rehabilitation services for stroke survivors in Iran.Methods: This economic evaluation was conducted from the payer's perspective with a lifetime horizon in Iran. A Markov model was designed and Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were the final outcomes. First, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Then, using the average net monetary benefit (NMB) of rehabilitation, the average Incremental Net Monetary Benefit (INMB) per patient was calculated. The analyses were carried out separately for public and private sector tariffs.Results: While considering public tariffs, the rehabilitation strategy had lower costs (US$5320 vs. US$ 6047) and higher QALYs (2.78 vs. 2.61) compared to non-rehabilitation. Regarding the private tariffs, the rehabilitation strategy had slightly higher costs (US$6,698 vs. US$6,182) but higher QALYs (2.78 vs. 2.61) compared to no rehabilitation. The average INMB of rehabilitation vs non-rehabilitation for each patient was estimated at US$1518 and US$275 based on Public and private tariffs, respectively.Conclusion: Providing multidisciplinary rehabilitation services to stroke patients was cost-effective and has positive INMBs in public and private tariffs.
引用
收藏
页码:659 / 669
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS - MISHAN,EJ
    OPSCHOOR, JB
    ECONOMIST, 1972, 120 (01): : 83 - 86
  • [42] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS IN FORESTRY SECTOR
    GRUT, M
    SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1975, 43 (02) : 187 - 204
  • [43] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND UTILITY THEORY
    RIVETT, P
    JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 1978, 29 (08) : 821 - 821
  • [44] AI IN FORESTRY - A COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    Ivanova, Maya
    WOODEMA 2024 - GREEN DEAL INITIATIVES, SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT, MARKET DEMANDS, AND NEW PRODUCTION PERSPECTIVES IN THE FORESTRY-BASED SECTOR, 2024, : 139 - 144
  • [45] TRANSPARENCY IN AGENCY COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    Cecot, Caroline
    Hahn, Robert W.
    ADMINISTRATIVE LAW REVIEW, 2020, 72 (02) : 157 - 206
  • [46] Value Typology in Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Baum, Seth D.
    ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES, 2012, 21 (04) : 499 - 524
  • [47] A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the ENIGMA Trial
    Graham, Alison M.
    Myles, Paul S.
    Leslie, Kate
    Chan, Matthew T. V.
    Paech, Michael J.
    Peyton, Philip
    El Dawlatly, Abdelazeem A.
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2011, 115 (02) : 265 - 272
  • [48] Education and the Rationale of Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Gilead, Tal
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL STUDIES, 2014, 62 (04) : 373 - 391
  • [49] More trouble for cost-benefit analysis
    Yohe, GW
    CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2003, 56 (03) : 235 - 244
  • [50] The fundamental principles of cost-benefit analysis
    Griffin, Ronald C.
    Water Resources Research, 1998, 34 (08): : 2063 - 2071