Search

Background: Stroke survivors encounter emotional problems in the chronic phase after stroke. Post-stroke depressive symptoms have major impact on health-related quality of life (HRQol) and lead to increased hospitalization and therefore substantial healthcare costs. We present a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility evaluation of a cognitive behavioural therapy augmented with occupational and movement therapy to support patients with a stroke with depressive symptoms in goal-setting and goal attainment (augmented CBT) in comparison with a computerized cognitive training program (CogniPlus) as a control intervention.Methods: A trial-based economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective with a time horizon of 12 months. Stroke patients (aged 18+ years) with signs of depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) - subscale depression > 7) were eligible to participate. Primary outcomes were the HADS and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) based on the three-level five-dimensional EuroQol (EQ-5D-3 L). Missing data were handled through mean imputation (costs) and multiple imputation (HADS and EuroQol), and costs were bootstrapped. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test robustness of baseline assumptions.Results: Sixty-one patients were included. The average total societal costs were not significantly different between the control group (€9,998.3) and the augmented CBT group (€8,063.7), with a 95 % confidence interval (-5,284, 1,796). The augmented CBT intervention was less costly and less effective from a societal perspective on the HADS, and less costly and slightly more effective in QALYs, in comparison with the control treatment. The cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses provided greater effects and fewer costs for the augmented CBT group, and fewer effects and costs for the HADS. Based on a willingness to pay (WTP) level of €40,000 per QALY, the augmented CBT intervention had a 76 % chance of being cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses showed robustness of results.Conclusion: The stroke-specific augmented CBT intervention did not show convincing cost-effectiveness results. In addition to other literature, this study provided new insights into the potential cost-effectiveness of an adjusted cognitive behavioural therapy intervention. However, as our study showed a 76 % chance of being cost-effective for one outcome measure (QALY) and did not provide convincing cost-effectiveness results on the HADS we recommend further research in a larger population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objective: The potential of perioperative goal-directed therapy (PGDT) to improve outcome after high-risk abdominal surgery remains subject of debate. In particular, there is a need for large, multicenter trials focusing on relevant patient outcomes to confirm the evidence found in small, single center studies including minor complications in their composite endpoints. The present study therefore aims to investigate the effect of an arterial waveform analysis based PGDT algorithm on the incidence of major complications including mortality after high-risk abdominal surgery.Design: Prospective randomized controlled multicenter trial.Setting: Operating theatres and Post-Anesthesia/Intensive Care units (PACU/ICU) of four tertiary hospitals in The Netherlands.Patients: A total number of 482 patients undergoing elective, abdominal surgery that is considered high-risk due to the extent of the procedure and/or patient comorbidities.Interventions: Hemodynamic therapy using an age-specific PGDT algorithm including cardiac index (CI) and stroke volume variation (SVV) measurements during a 24-h perioperative period starting at induction of anesthesia.Measurements: The average number of major complications (including mortality) within 30 days after surgery, the number of minor complications, hospital and PACU/ICU length of stay (LOS), amounts of fluids and vasoactive medications used. Complications were graded using the Accordion severity grading system.Results: The average number of major complications per patient was 0.79 (PGDT group) versus 0.69 (control group) (p = 0.195). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of minor complications, hospital LOS, PACU/ICU LOS, or grading of complications. Patients in the PGDT group received more fluids intraoperatively, more dobutamine intra- and postoperatively, while patients in the control group received more phenylephrine during the operation.Conclusions: PGDT based on a CI and SVV driven algorithm did not result in improved outcomes after high-risk abdominal surgery.Clinical Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry: NTR3380. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]