Cost-effectiveness Analysis of the Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) Intervention for Emergency Abdominal Surgical Care of Adults Aged 65 Years and Older | Geriatrics | JAMA Network Open | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.204.227.34. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Government of Canada. Action for seniors report. Published October 3, 2016. Accessed November 15, 2018. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/seniors-action-report.html#tc2a
2.
Turrentine  FE, Wang  H, Simpson  VB, Jones  RS.  Surgical risk factors, morbidity, and mortality in elderly patients.  J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203(6):865-877. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.08.026PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Gelsomino  S, Lorusso  R, Livi  U,  et al.  Cost and cost-effectiveness of cardiac surgery in elderly patients.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142(5):1062-1073. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.02.013PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Rockwood  K, Howlett  SE, MacKnight  C,  et al.  Prevalence, attributes, and outcomes of fitness and frailty in community-dwelling older adults: report from the Canadian study of health and aging.  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004;59(12):1310-1317. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.12.1310PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Etzioni  DA, Liu  JH, Maggard  MA, Ko  CY.  The aging population and its impact on the surgery workforce.  Ann Surg. 2003;238(2):170-177. doi:10.1097/01.SLA.0000081085.98792.3dPubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Creditor  MC.  Hazards of hospitalization of the elderly.  Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(3):219-223. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-118-3-199302010-00011PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Inouye  SK, Wagner  DR, Acampora  D, Horwitz  RI, Cooney  LM  Jr, Tinetii  ME.  A controlled trial of a nursing-centered intervention in hospitalized elderly medical patients: the Yale Geriatric Care Program.  J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993;41(12):1353-1360. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb06487.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Gillick  MR, Serrell  NA, Gillick  LS.  Adverse consequences of hospitalization in the elderly.  Soc Sci Med. 1982;16(10):1033-1038. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(82)90175-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Covinsky  KE, Palmer  RM, Fortinsky  RH,  et al.  Loss of independence in activities of daily living in older adults hospitalized with medical illnesses: increased vulnerability with age.  J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(4):451-458. doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51152.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Ahmed  NN, Pearce  SE.  Acute care for the elderly: a literature review.  Popul Health Manag. 2010;13(4):219-225. doi:10.1089/pop.2009.0058PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Steele  JS.  Current evidence regarding models of acute care for hospitalized geriatric patients.  Geriatr Nurs. 2010;31(5):331-347. doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2010.03.003PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Fox  MT, Persaud  M, Maimets  I,  et al.  Effectiveness of acute geriatric unit care using acute care for elders components: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60(12):2237-2245. doi:10.1111/jgs.12028PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Khadaroo  RG, Padwal  RS, Wagg  AS, Clement  F, Warkentin  LM, Holroyd-Leduc  J.  Optimizing senior’s surgical care: Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) study—rationale and objectives.  BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):338. doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1001-2PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Rockwood  K, Song  X, MacKnight  C,  et al.  A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people.  CMAJ. 2005;173(5):489-495. doi:10.1503/cmaj.050051PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Alberta Health. Drug products and pricing for Alberta Drug Benefit List (ADBL), Alberta Human Services Drug Benefit Supplement (HSDBS) and Palliative Coverage Drug Benefit Supplement (PCDBS). Published July 2018. Accessed November 28, 2018. https://www.ab.bluecross.ca/dbl/publications.html
16.
Statistics Canada. The consumer price index: January 2018. Published February 2018. Accessed July 9, 2018. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/62-001-x/62-001-x2018001-eng.pdf
17.
EuroQol Research Foundation. EQ-5D-3L user guide. Published April 2015. Accessed June 10, 2017. https://euroqol.org/publications/user-guides
18.
Bansback  N, Tsuchiya  A, Brazier  J, Anis  A.  Canadian valuation of EQ-5D health states: preliminary value set and considerations for future valuation studies.  PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31115. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031115PubMedGoogle Scholar
19.
Shoop  SJW.  Should we ban the use of “last observation carried forward” analysis in epidemiological studies?  SM J Public Health Epidemiol. 2015;1(1):1004. Accessed March 2, 2020. https://smjournals.com/public-health-epidemiology/download.php?file=fulltext/smjphe-v1-1004.pdfGoogle Scholar
20.
Dimick  JB, Ryan  AM.  Methods for evaluating changes in health care policy: the difference-in-differences approach.  JAMA. 2014;312(22):2401-2402. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16153PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Sano  M, Zhu  CW, Whitehouse  PJ,  et al.  ADCS Prevention Instrument Project: pharmacoeconomics–assessing health-related resource use among healthy elderly.  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2006;20(4)(suppl 3):S191-S202. doi:10.1097/01.wad.0000213875.63171.87PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Alberta Health. Alberta aids to daily living: program manual and product lists. Accessed August 23, 2018. https://www.alberta.ca/aadl-program-manual-and-product-lists.aspx
23.
Alberta Government. 2017 Alberta wage and salary survey. Published 2017. Accessed August 23, 2018. https://work.alberta.ca/documents/wage-and-salary-survey-overview.pdf
24.
Government of Canada. Consumer price index, annual average, not seasonally adjusted. Published May 30, 2018. Accessed July 9, 2018. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1810000501
25.
Fletcher  D, MacKenzie  D, Villouta  E.  Modelling skewed data with many zeros: a simple approach combining ordinary and logistic regression.  Environ Ecol Stat. 2005;12(1):45-54. doi:10.1007/s10651-005-6817-1Google ScholarCrossref
26.
Alberta Health Services. About AHS. Accessed November 15, 2018. https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/about/about.aspx
27.
Imai  K, Kim  IS. On the use of two-way fixed effects regression models for causal inference with panel data. Published January 12, 2020. Accessed March 2, 2020. http://web.mit.edu/insong/www/pdf/FEmatch-twoway.pdf
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Original Investigation
    Health Policy
    April 3, 2020

    Cost-effectiveness Analysis of the Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) Intervention for Emergency Abdominal Surgical Care of Adults Aged 65 Years and Older

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    • 2O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    • 3Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    • 4Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    • 5Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(4):e202034. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.2034
    Key Points español 中文 (chinese)

    Question  From the perspective of the health care system, what are the economic outcomes of the Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment intervention?

    Findings  In this economic evaluation of a controlled before-and-after study of elderly Canadian adults admitted for emergency abdominal surgery, the Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment intervention was associated with a reduction in costs and no change in quality-adjusted life-years.

    Meaning  These findings suggest that implementation of the Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment intervention should be considered in other centers; in locations lacking current capacity to implement this intervention, costs to increase capacity should be weighed against the estimated costs avoided.

    Abstract

    Importance  The Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) initiative is a novel approach to acute surgical care for elderly patients.

    Objective  To determine the cost-effectiveness of EASE.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  An economic evaluation from the perspective of the health care system was conducted as part of the controlled before-and-after EASE study at 2 tertiary care centers, the University of Alberta Hospital and Foothills Medical Centre. Participants included elderly adults (aged ≥65 years) admitted for emergency abdominal surgery between 2014 and 2017. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to February 2019.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  Data were captured at both control and intervention sites before and after implementation of the EASE intervention. Resource use was captured over 6 months of follow-up and was converted to costs. Utility was measured with the EuroQol Five-Dimensions Three-Levels instrument at 6 weeks and 6 months of follow-up. The differences-in-differences method was used to estimate the association of the intervention with cost and quality-adjusted life-years. For a subset of participants, self-reported out-of-pocket health care costs were collected using the Resource Use Inventory at 6 months.

    Results  A total of 675 participants were included (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [7.9] years; 333 women [49.3%]), 289 in the intervention group and 386 in the control group. The mean (SD) cost per control participant was $36 995 ($44 169) before EASE and $35 032 ($43 611) after EASE (all costs are shown in 2018 Canadian dollars). The mean (SD) cost per intervention participant was $56 143 ($74 039) before EASE and $39 001 ($59 854) after EASE. Controlling for age, sex, and Clinical Frailty Score, the EASE intervention was associated with a mean (SE) cost reduction of 23.5% (12.5%) (P = .02). The change in quality-adjusted life-years observed associated with the intervention was not statistically significant (mean [SE], 0.00001 [0.0001] quality-adjusted life-year; P = .72). The Resource Use Inventory was collected for 331 participants. The mean (SE) odds ratio for having 0 out-of-pocket expenses because of the intervention, compared with having expenses greater than 0, was 15.77 (3.37) (P = .02). Among participants with Resource Use Inventory costs greater than 0, EASE was not associated with a change in spending (mean [SE] reduction associated with EASE, 19.1% [45.2%]; P = .57).

    Conclusions and Relevance  This study suggests that the EASE intervention was associated with a reduction in costs and no change in quality-adjusted life-years. In locations that lack capacity to implement this intervention, costs to increase capacity should be weighed against the estimated costs avoided.

    ×