IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0258582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs for stroke patients–A systematic review

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Kass
  • Christina Dornquast
  • Andreas Meisel
  • Christine Holmberg
  • Nina Rieckmann
  • Thomas Reinhold

Abstract

Objective: Stroke remains a leading cause of premature death, impairment and reduced quality of life. Its aftercare is performed by numerous different health care service providers, resulting in a high need for coordination. Personally delivered patient navigation (PN) is a promising approach for managing pathways through health care systems and for improving patient outcomes. Although PN in stroke care is evolving, no summarized information on its cost-effectiveness in stroke survivors is available. Hence, the aim of this systematic review is to analyze the level of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors. Methods: A systematic literature search without time limitations was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL as well as PsycINFO and supplemented by a manual search. Randomized controlled trials published prior to April 2020 in English or German were considered eligible if any results regarding the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors were reported. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Quality of included studies was assessed with the RoB2 tool. Main study characteristics and cost-effectiveness results were summarized and discussed. Results: The search identified 1442 records, and two studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality of included studies was rated moderate and high. Programs, settings and cost-effectiveness results were heterogeneous, with one study showing a 90% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $25600 per QALY (health/social care perspective) and the other showing similar QALYs and higher costs. Conclusions: Since only two studies were eligible, this review reveals a large gap in knowledge regarding the cost-effectiveness of PN for stroke survivors. Furthermore, no conclusive statement about the cost-effectiveness can be made. Future attempts to evaluate PN for stroke survivors are necessary and should also involve cost-effectiveness issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Kass & Christina Dornquast & Andreas Meisel & Christine Holmberg & Nina Rieckmann & Thomas Reinhold, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs for stroke patients–A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0258582
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258582
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0258582&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0258582?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. S. Rajsic & H. Gothe & H. H. Borba & G. Sroczynski & J. Vujicic & T. Toell & Uwe Siebert, 2019. "Economic burden of stroke: a systematic review on post-stroke care," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 107-134, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Menteş, Nurettin & Çakmak, Mehmet Aziz & Kurt, Mehmet Emin, 2023. "Estimation of service length with the machine learning algorithms and neural networks for patients who receiving home health care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Ghislaine van Mastrigt & Caroline van Heugten & Anne Visser-Meily & Leonarda Bremmers & Silvia Evers, 2022. "Estimating the Burden of Stroke: Two-Year Societal Costs and Generic Health-Related Quality of Life of the Restore4Stroke Cohort," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Xuan Qiu & Yicheng Gao & Zhaoxu Zhang & Sijia Cheng & Shuangmei Zhang, 2021. "Fire Acupuncture versus conventional acupuncture to treat spasticity after stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Srujitha Marupuru & Melanie L. Bell & Michael A. Grandner & Ruth E. Taylor-Piliae, 2022. "The Effect of Physical Activity on Sleep Quality among Older Stroke Survivors: Secondary Analysis from a Randomized Controlled Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-10, October.

    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:pone00:0258582. 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.