Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rehabilitation Methods for Stroke Survivors

 WHY WAS THIS RESEARCH DONE? Survivors don't give a flying fuck about cost! THEY WANT 100% RECOVERY! GET THERE or you're fired!

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rehabilitation Methods for Stroke Survivors

authors:

Farzaneh Miri ¹ , Nader Jahanmehr ^{2 , 3 , *} , Reza Goudarzi ⁴

1 School of Management and Medical Education, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran

3 Virtual School of Medical Education and Management, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Modeling in Health Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

* Corresponding Author: Assistant Professor of Health Economics, Virtual School of Medical Education and Management, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Email: n.jahanmehr@gmail.com

---

Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health Studies: Vol.11, issue 4; e141716

published online: July 29, 2024

article type: Research Article

received: October 11, 2023

revised: July 2, 2024

accepted: July 6, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5812/mejrh-141716

how to cite: Miri F, Jahanmehr N, Goudarzi R. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rehabilitation Methods for Stroke Survivors. Middle East J Rehabil Health Stud. 2024;11(4):e141716. https://doi.org/10.5812/mejrh-141716.

Abstract

Background:

One of the challenges in stroke management is how to provide rehabilitation services to stroke patients in Iran.

Objectives:

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for stroke patients in three settings: hospitals, stroke units, and homes.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study was conducted from the perspective of the health system. A Markov model with a 20-year time horizon and 3-month cycles was used to analyze costs and outcomes. Cost data were collected from 210 patients undergoing rehabilitation in hospitals, homes, or stroke units. The cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was conducted by calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) using Tree Age software.

Results:

The average rehabilitation cost for the home strategy (2955 ± 48.18) and stroke unit (11424, 7233) per QALY, respectively. The ICERs for stroke unit and home rehabilitation relative to hospital rehabilitation were

2145 per QALY, respectively.

Conclusions:

According to the results, the home-based rehabilitation strategy is more cost-effective than hospital and stroke unit rehabilitation strategies. Given the high rates of stroke and its associated costs in Iran, it is suggested that policymakers lay the groundwork for providing these services at home.