Advertisement

Clinical Research in Cardiology

, Volume 104, Issue 4, pp 304–309 | Cite as

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a structured collaborative disease management in the Interdisciplinary Network for Heart Failure (INH) study

  • Anja NeumannEmail author
  • Sarah Mostardt
  • Janine Biermann
  • Götz Gelbrich
  • Alexander Goehler
  • Benjamin P. Geisler
  • Uwe Siebert
  • Stefan Störk
  • Georg Ertl
  • Christiane E. Angerrmann
  • Jürgen Wasem
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

Non-pharmacological treatment programmes are being developed, in which specialised nurses take care of heart failure (HF) patients. Such disease management programmes might increase survival and quality of life in HF patients, but evidence on their cost-effectiveness remains limited.

Methods and results

A prospective economic evaluation piggy-backed onto the randomised controlled Interdisciplinary Network for Heart Failure (INH) Study weighted costs of the intervention HeartNetCare -HF™ (HNC) regarding effectiveness, mortality and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). To consider uncertainty sensitivity analyses were performed. Compared to usual care (UC), HNC revealed 8,284 € per death avoided within the 6 month study follow-up period. The cost-utility analysis showed additional costs of 49,335 € per QALY.

Conclusion

Although HNC did not reduce short-term re-admission rates of HF patients hospitalised for cardiac decompensation within the first 180 days after discharge, HNC might reduce mortality and increase quality of life in these patients at reasonable costs. Therefore, long-term HNC-effects deserve further evaluation.

Keywords

Heart failure Economics Cost-utility Cost-effectiveness 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Competence Network of Heart Failure funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [01GI0205/23].

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Neumann T, Biermann J, Neumann A, Wasem J, Ertl G, Dietz R et al (2009) Herzinsuffizienz: Häufigster Grund für Krankenhausaufenthalte, Medizinische und ökonomische Aspekte [Heart Failure: The most common reason for hospitalization, medical and economic aspects]. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 106(16):269–275PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Federal Office of Statistics Germany (2004) Krankheitskostenrechnung für Deutschland. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/WirtschaftStatistik/Gesundheitswesen/Krankheitskosten.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Accessed 5 September 2012
  3. 3.
    Angermann CE, Störk S, Gelbrich G, Faller H, Jahns R, Frantz S et al (2012) Mode of action and effects of standardized collaborative disease management on mortality and morbidity in patients with systolic heart failure: The Interdisciplinary Network for Heart Failure (INH) Study. Circ Heart Fail 5(1):25–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Göhler A, Conrads-Frank A, Worrell SS, Geisler BP, Halpern EF, Dietz R et al (2008) Decision-analytic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of management programmes in chronic heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 10(10):1026–1032CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Krauth C, Hessel F, Hansmeier T, Wasem J, Seitz R, Schweikert B (2005) Empirical standard costs for health economic evaluation in Germany—a proposal by the working group methods in health economic evaluation. Gesundheitswesen 67(10):736–746CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Solomon SD, Dobson J, Pocock S, Skali H, McMurray JJ, Granger CB et al (2007) Influence of nonfatal hospitalization for heart failure on subsequent mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. Circulation 116(13):1482–1487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Capomolla S, Febo O, Ceresa M, Caporotondi A, Guazzotti G, La Rovere M et al (2002) Cost/utility ratio in chronic heart failure: comparison between heart failure management programme delivered by day-hospital and usual care. J Am Coll Cardiol 40(7):1259–1266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Del Sindaco D, Pulignano G, Minardi G, Apostoli A, Guerrieri L, Rotoloni M et al (2007) Two-year outcome of a prospective, controlled study of a disease management programme for elderly patients with heart failure. J Cardiovasc Med 8(5):324–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koelling TM, Johnson ML, Cody RJ, Aaronson KD (2005) Discharge education improves clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure. Circulation 111(2):179–185CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kimmelstiel C, Levine D, Perry K, Patel AR, Sadaniantz A, Gorham N et al (2004) Randomized, controlled evaluation of short- and long-term benefits of heart failure disease management within a diverse provider network: The SPAN-HF Trial. Circulation 110(11):1450–1455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Biermann J, Mostardt S, Neumann T, Erbel R, Wasem J, Neumann A (2010) Cost-Effectiveness of study nurses in the management of patients with heart failure. A systematic review. Herz 35(4):273–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sanders GD, Hlatky MA, Owens DK (2005) Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. N Engl J Med 353(14):1471–1480CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anja Neumann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sarah Mostardt
    • 1
  • Janine Biermann
    • 1
  • Götz Gelbrich
    • 2
  • Alexander Goehler
    • 3
  • Benjamin P. Geisler
    • 3
  • Uwe Siebert
    • 3
  • Stefan Störk
    • 4
  • Georg Ertl
    • 4
  • Christiane E. Angerrmann
    • 4
  • Jürgen Wasem
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Health Care Management and ResearchUniversity Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and BiometryUniversity of WürzburgWürzburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of Public Health and Health Technology AssessmentUMITTirolAustria
  4. 4.Department of Internal Medicine I and Comprehensive Heart Failure CenteUniversity of WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations