White Rose University Consortium logo
University of Leeds logo University of Sheffield logo York University logo

Randomized trial of a brief physiotherapy intervention compared with usual physiotherapy for neck pain patients: cost-effectiveness analysis

Manca, A., Epstein, D.M., Torgerson, D.J., Klaber Moffett, J.A., Coulton, S., Farrin, A.J., Hahn, S., Jackson, D.A. and Richmond, S.J. (2006) Randomized trial of a brief physiotherapy intervention compared with usual physiotherapy for neck pain patients: cost-effectiveness analysis. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22 (1). pp. 67-75. ISSN 0226-4623

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of brief physiotherapy intervention versus usual physiotherapy management in patients with neck pain of musculoskeletal origin in the community setting.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled clinical trial. Individuals 18 years of age and older with neck pain of more than 2 weeks were recruited from physiotherapy departments with referrals from general practitioners (GPs) in the East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire regions in the United Kingdom. A total of 139 patients were allocated to the brief intervention, and 129 to the usual physiotherapy. Resource use data were prospectively collected on the number of physiotherapy sessions, hospital stay, specialist, and GP visits. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using EQ-5D data collected at baseline, 3 and 12 months from the start of the treatment. The economic evaluation was conducted from the U.K. National Health System perspective.

RESULTS

On average, brief intervention produced lower costs (£−68; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], £−103 to £−35) and marginally lower QALYs (−0.001; 95 percent CI, −0.030 to 0.028) compared with usual physiotherapy, resulting in an incremental cost per QALY of £68,000 for usual physiotherapy. These results are sensitive to patients' treatment preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Usual physiotherapy may not be good value for money for the average individual in this trial but could be a cost-effective strategy for those who are indifferent toward which treatment they receive.

Item Type: Article
Institution: The University of York
Academic Units: The University of York > Centre for Health Economics (York)
Depositing User: York RAE Import
Date Deposited: 08 May 2009 14:02
Last Modified: 08 May 2009 14:02
Published Version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462306050859
Status: Published
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Identification Number: 10.1017/S0266462306050859
URI: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/6455

Actions (repository staff only: login required)