title: Cost-effectiveness of a coronary heart disease secondary prevention program in patients with myocardial infarction: results from a randomised controlled trial (ProActive Heart).
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Participation in coronary heart disease (CHD) secondary prevention programs is low. Telephone-delivered CHD secondary prevention programs may overcome the treatment gap. The telephone-based health coaching ProActive Heart trial intervention has previously been shown to be effective for improving health-related quality of life, physical activity, body mass index, diet, alcohol intake and anxiety. As a secondary aim, the current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the ProActive Heart intervention compared to usual care.
  
  
  METHODS
  430 adult myocardial infarction patients were randomised to a six-month CHD secondary prevention 'health coaching' intervention or 'usual care' control group. Primary outcome variables were health-related quality of life (SF-36) and physical activity (Active Australia Survey). Data were collected at baseline, six-months (post-intervention) and 12 months (six-months post-intervention completion) for longer term effects. Cost-effectiveness data [health utility (SF-6D) and health care utilisation] were collected using self-reported (general practitioner, specialist, other health professionals, health services, and medication) and claims data (hospitalisation rates). Intervention effects are presented as mean differences (95% CI), p-value.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Improvements in health status (SF-6D) were observed in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups at six [0.012 (-0.016, 0.041), p = 0.372] or 12 months [0.011 (-0.028, 0.051) p = 0.738]. Patients in the health coaching group were significantly more likely to be admitted to hospital due to causes unrelated to cardiovascular disease (p = 0.042). The overall cost for the health coaching group was higher ($10,574 vs. $8,534, p = 0.021), mainly due to higher hospitalisation (both CHD and non-CHD) costs ($6,841 vs. $4,984, p = 0.036). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $85,423 per QALY.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There was no intervention effect measured using the SF-36/SF-6D and ProActive Heart resulted in significantly increased costs. The cost per QALY gained from ProActive Heart was high and above acceptable limits compared to usual care.
authors: Erika
authors: E
authors: Turkstra
authors: Anna L
authors: AL
authors: Hawkes
authors: Brian
authors: B
authors: Oldenburg
authors: Paul A
authors: PA
authors: Scuffham
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000428:Alcohol Drinking; D015992:Body Mass Index; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004032:Diet; D037001:Directive Counseling / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D015438:Health Behavior; D006760:Hospitalization; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008603:Mental Health; D008875:Middle Aged; D009043:Motor Activity; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000517:prevention & control* / Q000523:psychology; D011788:Quality of Life; D055502:Secondary Prevention / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D013689:Telephone
references: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Aug 18;44(4):810-9
references: 15312864
references: Am J Prev Med. 2012 Jan;42(1):81-8
references: 22176852
references: Am J Manag Care. 2008 Feb;14(2):106-15
references: 18269306
references: Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2014 Jan;21(1):30-8
references: 22956633
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(1):CD001800
references: 11279730
references: BMJ. 2001 Oct 27;323(7319):957-62
references: 11679383
references: Diabetes Care. 2003 Apr;26(4):1058-63
references: 12663573
references: Circulation. 1994 Mar;89(3):975-90
references: 8124838
references: BMC Public Health. 2012 Feb 10;12:114
references: 22325668
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Aug 04;(8):CD007228
references: 20687083
references: J Occup Environ Med. 2009 Jul;51(7):786-96
references: 19528832
references: Ann Intern Med. 1994 May 1;120(9):721-9
references: 8147544
references: Am J Prev Med. 2009 Feb;36(2):142-9
references: 19062240
references: Nurs Econ. 2008 Jan-Feb;26(1):41-4
references: 18389841
references: PLoS One. 2009 Sep 25;4(9):e7135
references: 19779611
references: J Health Econ. 2002 Mar;21(2):271-92
references: 11939242
references: BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2009 May 09;9:16
references: 19426524
references: Ann Behav Med. 2009 Oct;38(2):71-85
references: 20012809
references: Int J Behav Med. 2013 Sep;20(3):413-24
references: 23012159
references: Arch Intern Med. 2003 Dec 8-22;163(22):2775-83
references: 14662633
references: Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(6):427-47
references: 18720118