Cost–utility and cost-effectiveness of physical exercise during adjuvant chemotherapy

Hanna Waart, Johanna M. Dongen, Wim H. Harten, Martijn M. Stuiver, Rosalie Huijsmans, Jeannette A. J. H. Hellendoorn- van Vreeswijk, Gabe S. Sonke and Neil K. Aaronson ()
Additional contact information
Hanna Waart: Netherlands Cancer Institute
Johanna M. Dongen: VU University Amsterdam
Wim H. Harten: Netherlands Cancer Institute
Martijn M. Stuiver: Netherlands Cancer Institute
Rosalie Huijsmans: VU University Medical Center
Jeannette A. J. H. Hellendoorn- van Vreeswijk: Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization
Gabe S. Sonke: Netherlands Cancer Institute
Neil K. Aaronson: Netherlands Cancer Institute

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2018, vol. 19, issue 6, No 12, 893-904

Abstract: Abstract Introduction A home-based, low-intensity physical activity program (Onco-Move) and a supervised, moderate-to-high intensity, combined resistance and aerobic exercise program (OnTrack) have proven to be effective in maintaining physical fitness and reducing fatigue among breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. This study evaluated the cost–utility and cost-effectiveness of Onco-Move and OnTrack. Methods A total of 230 patients were randomized to Onco-Move, OnTrack, or usual care (UC). Health outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), general and physical fatigue, and physical fitness measured at baseline, end of chemotherapy, and 6-month follow-up. Societal costs included professional and informal health care, work absenteeism, and unpaid productivity costs. Cost data were based on 3-monthly questionnaires, supplemented by medication data obtained from pharmacies. Results Onco-Move is not likely to be cost-effective due to the relatively high willingness-to-pay necessary to reach reasonable probabilities of cost-effectiveness (QALY, general and physical fatigue). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for OnTrack compared to UC were €26,916/QALY, €788/1-point decrease in general fatigue and €1402/1-point decrease in physical fatigue. The probability of OnTrack being cost-effective ranged from 31% at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €0–79% at a WTP of €80,000/QALY, 97% at a WTP of €15,000/1-point decrease in general fatigue, and 86% at a WTP of €24,000/1-point decrease in physical fatigue. Both interventions had a low probability of being cost-effective for physical fitness. The probability of cost-effectiveness for both interventions was greater among compliant participants. Conclusions Onco-Move is not likely to be cost-effective. Depending on the decision-makers’ willingness-to-pay, OnTrack could be considered cost-effective in comparison with UC. Trial registration Clinical trial registration number of the Netherlands Trial Register—NTR2159.

Keywords: Health economics; Exercise; Physical activity; Physical therapy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I12 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-017-0936-0 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:19:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s10198-017-0936-0

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-017-0936-0

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().