...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Pediatrics >Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of hospital-based home care compared to hospital-based care for children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes; a randomised controlled trial; results after two years’ follow-up
【24h】

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of hospital-based home care compared to hospital-based care for children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes; a randomised controlled trial; results after two years’ follow-up

机译:与诊断为1型糖尿病儿童的医院为基础的家庭护理相比,医院为基础的家庭护理的成本-效果和成本-效用分析;随机对照试验;两年的随访结果

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background Practices regarding hospitalisation of children at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes vary both within countries and internationally, and high-quality evidence of best practice is scarce. The objective of this study was to close some of the gaps in evidence by comparing two alternative regimens for children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes: hospital-based care and hospital-based home care (HBHC), referring to specialist care in a home-based setting. Methods A randomised controlled trial, including 60 children aged 3–15 years, took place at a university hospital in Sweden. When the children were medically stable, they were randomised to either the traditional, hospital-based care or to HBHC. Results Two years after diagnosis there were no differences in HbA1c ( p = 0.777), in episodes of severe hypoglycaemia ( p = 0.167), or in insulin U/kg/24 h ( p = 0.269). Over 24 months, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in how parents’ reported the impact of paediatric chronic health condition on family ( p = 0.138) or in parents’ self-reported health-related quality of life ( p = 0.067). However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding healthcare satisfaction, favouring HBHC ( p = 0.002). In total, healthcare costs (direct costs) were significantly lower in the HBHC group but no statistically significant difference between the two groups in estimated lost production (indirect costs) for the family as a whole. Whereas mothers had a significantly lower value of lost production, when their children were treated within the HBHC regime, fathers had a higher, but not a significantly higher value. The results indicate that HBHC might be a cost-effective strategy in a healthcare sector perspective. When using the wider societal perspective, no difference in cost effectiveness or cost utility was found. Conclusions Overall, there are only a few, well-designed and controlled studies that compare hospital care to different models of home care. The results of this study provide empirical support for the safety and feasibility of HBHC when a child is diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Our results further indicate that the model of care may have an impact on families’ daily living, not only during the initial period of care but for a longer period of time. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov with identity number NCT00804232 , December 2008.
机译:背景技术在国家和国际范围内,有关诊断1型糖尿病的儿童住院治疗的做法各不相同,并且缺乏最佳做法的高质量证据。这项研究的目的是通过比较两种被诊断为1型糖尿病的儿童的替代方案来弥补一些证据不足:医院为基础的护理和医院为基础的家庭护理(HBHC),指的是家庭基础的专科护理设置。方法在瑞典的一家大学医院进行了一项随机对照试验,包括60名3-15岁的儿童。当孩子的病情稳定后,他们将被随机分配到传统的医院护理或HBHC。结果诊断后两年,HbA1c(p = 0.777),严重低血糖发作(p = 0.167)或胰岛素U / kg / 24 h(p = 0.269)没有差异。在过去的24个月中,两组之间在父母报告小儿慢性健康状况对家庭的影响(p = 0.138)或父母自我报告的健康相关生活质量(p = 0.067)方面,在统计学上无显着差异。但是,在医疗保健满意度上存在统计学上的显着差异,偏爱HBHC(p = 0.002)。总体而言,HBHC组的医疗保健成本(直接成本)显着降低,但两组的整个家庭的估计生产损失(间接成本)在统计学上没有显着差异。母亲的生产损失价值明显较低,而当孩子在HBHC体制下接受治疗时,父亲的生产价值却较高,但没有显着提高。结果表明,从保健部门的角度来看,HBHC可能是一种具有成本效益的策略。当使用更广泛的社会视角时,在成本效益或成本效用方面没有发现差异。结论总体而言,只有少数精心设计和对照的研究将医院护理与不同的家庭护理模式进行了比较。这项研究的结果为儿童诊断为1型糖尿病时HBHC的安全性和可行性提供了经验支持。我们的结果进一步表明,照护模式可能会影响家庭的日常生活,不仅在照护初期,而且在更长的时间内。试用注册ClinicalTrials.gov,标识号为NCT00804232,2008年12月。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号