Remotely delivered physiotherapy for musculoskeletal conditions is cost saving for the health system and patients: economic evaluation of the REFORM randomised trial
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Hayes, A.J.Withers, H.G.
Glinsky, J.V.
Chu, J.
Jennings, M.D.
Starkey, I.
Parmeter, R.
Boulos, M.
Cruwys, J.J.
Duong, K.
Jordan, I.
Wong, D.
Trang, S.
Duong, M.
Liu, H.
Lambert, T.E.
Zadro, J.R.
Sherrington, C.
Maher, C.
Lucas, B.R.
Taylor, D.
Ferreira, M.L.
Harvey, L.A.
Abstract
QUESTIONS: Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost saving when compared with usual face-to-face physiotherapy as typically provided in a public hospital outpatient setting? Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost-effective? DESIGN: Economic evaluation embedded within a randomised ...
See moreQUESTIONS: Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost saving when compared with usual face-to-face physiotherapy as typically provided in a public hospital outpatient setting? Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost-effective? DESIGN: Economic evaluation embedded within a randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial using a health system plus patient perspective. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with musculoskeletal conditions presenting to Sydney public hospitals for physiotherapy treatment. INTERVENTION: REFORM was a randomised controlled trial comparing remotely delivered physiotherapy with usual care provided in an outpatient setting. Remotely delivered physiotherapy involved one face-to-face physiotherapy session in conjunction with text messages, phone calls and an individualised exercise program delivered through an 'App'. OUTCOME MEASURES: The economic evaluation included the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks in the cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analyses, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 26 weeks in the cost-utility analysis. Health system and patient resource use were derived from patient self-report. RESULTS: Costs per participant over 6 weeks were AUD $742 for remotely delivered physiotherapy and $910 for face-to-face physiotherapy, with a mean cost difference of -$168 (95% CI -$339 to $1). There was a 98% probability of remotely delivered physiotherapy being cost saving within the non-inferiority margin of the Patient Specific Functional Scale, and an 88% probability of being dominant to face-to-face physiotherapy (less costly and more effective). There was a 51% probability of being cost-effective at a nominal $50,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: Moving people with musculoskeletal conditions to a remote model of physiotherapy care is potentially cost saving for health systems and patients, without compromising health outcomes when compared with currently provided public hospital care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619000065190.
See less
See moreQUESTIONS: Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost saving when compared with usual face-to-face physiotherapy as typically provided in a public hospital outpatient setting? Is remotely delivered physiotherapy cost-effective? DESIGN: Economic evaluation embedded within a randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial using a health system plus patient perspective. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with musculoskeletal conditions presenting to Sydney public hospitals for physiotherapy treatment. INTERVENTION: REFORM was a randomised controlled trial comparing remotely delivered physiotherapy with usual care provided in an outpatient setting. Remotely delivered physiotherapy involved one face-to-face physiotherapy session in conjunction with text messages, phone calls and an individualised exercise program delivered through an 'App'. OUTCOME MEASURES: The economic evaluation included the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks in the cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analyses, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 26 weeks in the cost-utility analysis. Health system and patient resource use were derived from patient self-report. RESULTS: Costs per participant over 6 weeks were AUD $742 for remotely delivered physiotherapy and $910 for face-to-face physiotherapy, with a mean cost difference of -$168 (95% CI -$339 to $1). There was a 98% probability of remotely delivered physiotherapy being cost saving within the non-inferiority margin of the Patient Specific Functional Scale, and an 88% probability of being dominant to face-to-face physiotherapy (less costly and more effective). There was a 51% probability of being cost-effective at a nominal $50,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: Moving people with musculoskeletal conditions to a remote model of physiotherapy care is potentially cost saving for health systems and patients, without compromising health outcomes when compared with currently provided public hospital care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619000065190.
See less
Date
2025Volume
71Issue
3Licence
Copyright All Rights ReservedFaculty/School
Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health SciencesDepartment, Discipline or Centre
Institute for Musculoskeletal HealthSubjects
3205 Clinical SciencesShare