Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The cost effectiveness of REACH-HF and home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with the usual medical care for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a decision model-based analysis

  • Rod S . Taylor (Lead / Corresponding author)
  • , Susannah Sadler
  • , Hasnain M. Dalal
  • , Fiona C. Warren
  • , Kate Jolly
  • , Russell C. Davis
  • , Patrick Doherty
  • , Jackie Miles
  • , Colin J. Greaves
  • , Jennifer Wingham
  • , Melvyn Hillsdon
  • , Charles Abraham
  • , Julia Frost
  • , Sally Singh
  • , Christopher Hayward
  • , Victoria Eyre
  • , Kevin Paul
  • , Chim C. Lang
  • , Karen Smith
  • , REACH-HF investigators

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    324 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Background: The REACH-HF (Rehabilitation EnAblement in CHronic Heart Failure) trial found that the REACH-HF home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention resulted in a clinically meaningful improvement in disease-specific health-related quality of life in patients with reduced ejection fraction heart failure (HFrEF). The aims of this study were to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of the addition of REACH-HF intervention or home-based cardiac rehabilitation to usual care compared with usual care alone in patients with HFrEF.

    Design and methods: A Markov model was developed using a patient lifetime horizon and integrating evidence from the REACH-HF trial, a systematic review/meta-analysis of randomised trials, estimates of mortality and hospital admission and UK costs at 2015/2016 prices. Taking a UK National Health and Personal Social Services perspective we report the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, assessing uncertainty using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

    Results: In base case analysis, the REACH-HF intervention was associated with per patient mean QALY gain of 0.23 and an increased mean cost of £400 compared with usual care, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of £1720. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 78% probability that REACH-HF is cost effective versus usual care at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. Results were similar for home-based cardiac rehabilitation versus usual care. Sensitivity analyses indicate the findings to be robust to changes in model assumptions and parameters.

    Conclusions: Our cost-utility analyses indicate that the addition of the REACH-HF intervention and home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are likely to be cost-effective treatment options versus usual care alone in patients with HFrEF.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1252-1261
    Number of pages10
    JournalEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology
    Volume26
    Issue number12
    Early online date18 Mar 2019
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Aug 2019

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
      SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

    Keywords

    • Cardiac rehabilitation
    • cost-effectiveness
    • decision model
    • health-related quality of life
    • heart failure
    • home-based

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Epidemiology
    • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The cost effectiveness of REACH-HF and home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with the usual medical care for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a decision model-based analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this