IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0134657.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Additional Homeopathic Treatment Save Costs? A Retrospective Cost-Analysis Based on 44500 Insured Persons

Author

Listed:
  • Julia K Ostermann
  • Thomas Reinhold
  • Claudia M Witt

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the health care costs for patients using additional homeopathic treatment (homeopathy group) with the costs for those receiving usual care (control group). Methods: Cost data provided by a large German statutory health insurance company were retrospectively analysed from the societal perspective (primary outcome) and from the statutory health insurance perspective. Patients in both groups were matched using a propensity score matching procedure based on socio-demographic variables as well as costs, number of hospital stays and sick leave days in the previous 12 months. Total cumulative costs over 18 months were compared between the groups with an analysis of covariance (adjusted for baseline costs) across diagnoses and for six specific diagnoses (depression, migraine, allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, and headache). Results: Data from 44,550 patients (67.3% females) were available for analysis. From the societal perspective, total costs after 18 months were higher in the homeopathy group (adj. mean: EUR 7,207.72 [95% CI 7,001.14–7,414.29]) than in the control group (EUR 5,857.56 [5,650.98–6,064.13]; p

Suggested Citation

  • Julia K Ostermann & Thomas Reinhold & Claudia M Witt, 2015. "Can Additional Homeopathic Treatment Save Costs? A Retrospective Cost-Analysis Based on 44500 Insured Persons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-11, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0134657
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134657
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134657
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134657&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0134657?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petter Viksveen & Zofia Dymitr & Steven Simoens, 2014. "Economic evaluations of homeopathy: a review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(2), pages 157-174, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julia K Ostermann & Claudia M Witt & Thomas Reinhold, 2017. "A retrospective cost-analysis of additional homeopathic treatment in Germany: Long-term economic outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-13, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julia K Ostermann & Claudia M Witt & Thomas Reinhold, 2017. "A retrospective cost-analysis of additional homeopathic treatment in Germany: Long-term economic outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-13, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0134657. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.