Suchergebnisse

Objective: We aimed to review health-economic evaluations of (hypothetical) intervention programmes for the primary prevention of dementia, and highlight challenges and provide recommendations for future research to estimate its cost-effectiveness. Methods: We searched the databases PubMed, MODEM, CEA and NHS for publications on the cost-consequence, -effectiveness, -utility or -benefit analysis of (hypothetical) interventions to reduce the risk of developing dementia for persons without dementia, and described the study characteristics. Results: Three publications described the evaluation of a hypothetical risk reduction due to physical activity or a multidomain intervention programme. Two studies reported a reduction of care costs. One study yielded two scenarios of increased care costs and one scenario of reduced care costs. Only one study reported the impact in QALY terms, and found a QALY gain. Conclusion: A few studies have evaluated a hypothetical multidomain prevention intervention, and reported that primary dementia prevention is potentially cost-saving or cost-effective. Various challenges remain to evaluate the health-economic impact of prevention interventions, including extrapolation of short-term trial effects, care costs in the dementia-free and life years gained, and accurate representation of usual care. We recommend extensive sensitivity analyses to examine the impact of assumptions regarding these aspects on the outcomes of cost-effectiveness studies.

The project is supported through the following funding organizations under the aegis of JPND - www.jpnd.eu. Germany, Ministry of Education and Research, Ireland, Health research board, Italy, Ministry of Health, the Netherlands, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development, Sweden, The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, Norway, The Research Council of Norway, Portugal, Foundation for Science and Technology, (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT - JPND-HC/0001/2012), United Kingdom, Economic and Social Research Council. JPND has read and approved of the protocol of the Actifcare study. ; Background: Previous findings indicate that people with dementia and their informal carers experience difficulties accessing and using formal care services due to a mismatch between needs and service use. This mismatch causes overall dissatisfaction and is a waste of the scarce financial care resources. This article presents the background and methods of the Actifcare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project. This is a European study aiming at best-practice development in finding timely access to formal care for community-dwelling people with dementia and their informal carers. There are five main objectives: 1) Explore predisposing and enabling factors associated with the use of formal care, 2) Explore the association between the use of formal care, needs and quality of life and 3) Compare these across European countries, 4) Understand the costs and consequences of formal care services utilization in people with unmet needs, 5) Determine the major costs and quality of life drivers and their relationship with formal care services across European countries. Methods: In a longitudinal cohort study conducted in eight European countries approximately 450 people with dementia and informal carers will be assessed three times in 1 year (baseline, 6 and 12 months). In this year we will closely monitor the process of finding access to formal care. Data on service use, quality of life and needs will be collected. Discussion: The results of Actifcare are expected to reveal best-practices in organizing formal care. Knowledge about enabling and predisposing factors regarding access to care services, as well as its costs and consequences, can advance the state of the art in health systems research into pathways to dementia care, in order to benefit people with dementia and their informal carers. ; publishersversion ; published

Background:With 10.5 million people with dementia in Europe and $301 billion associated costs, governments face challenges organizing access to care. Objective:To examine the costs related to formal and informal care use and quality of life for people with dementia in eight European countries, and explore the association with unmet needs. Methods:Cross-sectional data from 451 persons with dementia and their informal caregivers of the Actifcare cohort study were obtained. Formal and informal care use was multiplied by country specific unit prices of services. Needs were measured using the CANE and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the person with dementia (both self- and proxy-rated) and informal caregiver's quality of life using EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-O, DEMQOL-U, and CarerQol utility scores. The association between costs and country, European region, and unmet needs was assessed using multi-level linear regression. Results:Self-rated EQ-5D-5L utility score was higher than proxy-rated (0.84 and 0.71, respectively). Informal caregivers' utility score was 0.84. Across eight countries annual mean costs of formal and informal care were approximately € 17,000. Unmet needs were not associated with annual costs of care, nor with proxy-rated HRQOL, but were associated with self-rated HRQOL. Conclusion:We found varying relationships between unmet needs and quality of life, and no association between unmet needs and care costs, although the results were sensitive to various factors. Future research should further investigate the relation between unmet needs, quality of life and costs to generate a better understanding of the effects of (un)timely access to care.

Background: With 10.5 million people with dementia in Europe and $301 billion associated costs, governments face challenges organizing access to care. Objective: To examine the costs related to formal and informal care use and quality of life for people with dementia in eight European countries, and explore the association with unmet needs. Methods: Cross-sectional data from 451 persons with dementia and their informal caregivers of the Actifcare cohort study were obtained. Formal and informal care use was multiplied by country specific unit prices of services. Needs were measured using the CANE and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the person with dementia (both self- and proxy-rated) and informal caregiver's quality of life using EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-O, DEMQOL-U, and CarerQol utility scores. The association between costs and country, European region, and unmet needs was assessed using multi-level linear regression. Results: Self-rated EQ-5D-5L utility score was higher than proxy-rated (0.84 and 0.71, respectively). Informal caregivers' utility score was 0.84. Across eight countries annual mean costs of formal and informal care were approximately (sic)17,000. Unmet needs were not associated with annual costs of care, nor with proxy-rated HRQOL, but were associated with self-rated HRQOL. Conclusion: We found varying relationships between unmet needs and quality of life, and no association between unmet needs and care costs, although the results were sensitive to various factors. Future research should further investigate the relation between unmet needs, quality of life and costs to generate a better understanding of the effects of (un)timely access to care.