Regarding a clinical trial that evaluate an educational intervention for diabetic patients, 78 patients were enrolled (39 in control and 39 in intervention group)... However, only 60 patients (30 in each group) had completed the study .... So in this case how to measure costs? can someone calculate costs for only those who completed the study? or we must add costs for medications, education and consultation for those who lost in follow up?
Is it normal to get higher costs among control group because they use more medications? can someone measure ICER by measuring the difference between 2 group in regard to difference in costs between start and end of study (for each group) [ delta cost difference of group 1 - delta cost difference of group 2]? if it is OK, can someone provide me with a reference about it
On the other hand, the study was for 6 months of follow up, can I measure QALY according to 6 months values of quality of life? how to solve such problem?
Depends on cost efeectiveness study's perspective (e.g societal, patient, payer etc)
Dear Sergio, I will take from healthcare professional view and governmental view (payer)
ICER is used when you have a new costly/more effective intervention and you want to access its economic burden as compared to an alternative standard of care. This may not be your case, as the educational intervention can save resources. So, you should obtain the net cost saving instead. The sample size for micro-costing usually depends on qualitative assessment. You will find more on these subjects at:
CEA studies: https://www.cdc.gov/policy/polaris/economics/cost-effectiveness.html
Micro-costing: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/18510449.pdf
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry
- Nanotechnology
- Nanostructures
- Thin Films