Skip to main content

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
Cancel
×
×
Home
  • Home
Article
  • Access
  • Open access

ECONOMIC EVALUATION STUDIES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN CHRONIC DISEASES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

  • Mitchel van Eeden (a1) (a2), Caroline M. van Heugten (a3) (a4), Ghislaine A.P.G. van Mastrigt (a1) and Silvia M.A.A. Evers (a1) (a5)
Abstract

Background: To our knowledge, there has been no overall systematic review focusing on the methodological quality of full economic evaluation studies of self-management interventions. Our objective was to systematically review the literature of full economic evaluation studies of self-management interventions in adult chronic patients and to investigate their methodological quality and cost-effectiveness.

Methods: A data extraction form was developed to assess general and randomized controlled trial (RCT) -related characteristics, quality, of the RCTs, economic information and quality of the economic evaluation studies by means of a quality assessment (CHEC-list for trial-based studies, adjusted CHEC-list for model-based studies).

Results: Twenty-three reports were found. Sixteen studies (73 percent) lack information on the control intervention(s). Only one study fulfilled all three criteria for quality of RCTs and five studies (23 percent) did not meet any of these criteria. This review included one model-based study; the other studies were trial-based economic evaluation studies based on a RCT. Eight studies (35 percent) used a societal perspective and 12 (60 percent) synthesized costs and effects. Seven studies were categorized into the highest category (<15 score), nine studies into the “moderate” group (9–14 score), six studies received a “low” score (<8) on the CHEC-list. Eighteen studies found the self-management intervention(s) to be cost-effective compared with other interventions

Conclusions: Self-management interventions for adult chronic patients were heterogeneous and there was no clear, well-considered definition of self-management. Overall, the methodological quality of the full economic evaluation studies was moderate and, therefore, cost-effectiveness results must be interpreted with caution. Future research will benefit from further improvements in methodological quality of both economic study design and analysis, as well as a taxonomy for describing self-management interventions and their contents.

  • View HTML
      • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      ECONOMIC EVALUATION STUDIES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN CHRONIC DISEASES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      ECONOMIC EVALUATION STUDIES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN CHRONIC DISEASES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      ECONOMIC EVALUATION STUDIES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN CHRONIC DISEASES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
COPYRIGHT: © Cambridge University Press 2016
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
1. World Health Organization. Health topics. Geneva: WHO; 2012.
2. Barlow, J, Wright, C, Sheasby, J, Turner, A, Hainsworth, J. Self-management approaches for people with chronic conditions: A review. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;48:177–187.
3. Suhrcke, M, Nugent, R, Stuckler, D, Rocco, L. Chronic disease: An economic perspective. The Oxford Health Alliance. 2006:60.
4. Lorig, KR, Sobel, DS, Stewart, AL, et al. Evidence suggesting that a chronic disease self-management program can improve health status while reducing hospitalization: A randomized trial. Med Care. 1999;37:5–14.
5. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191–215.
6. Franek, J. Self-management support interventions for persons with chronic disease: An evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2013;13:1–60.
7. Janson, SL, McGrath, KW, Covington, JK, Cheng, SC, Boushey, HA. Individualized asthma self-management improves medication adherence and markers of asthma control. j Allergy Clin Immunol. 2009;123:840–846.
8. Warsi, A, Wang, PS, LaValley, MP, Avorn, J, Solomon, DH. Self-management education programs in chronic disease: A systematic review and methodological critique of the literature. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1641–1649.
9. Willems, DC, Joore, MA, Hendriks, JJ, Wouters, EF, Severens, JL. Cost-effectiveness of self-management in asthma: A systematic review of peak flow monitoring interventions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:436–442.
10. Drummond, MF, Jefferson, TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the bmj. The bmj economic evaluation working party. BMJ. 1996;313:275–283.
11. Martin, CM. Chronic disease and illness care: Adding principles of family medicine to address ongoing health system redesign. Can Fam Physician. 2007;53:2086–2091.
12. Alton, V, Eckerlund, I, Norlund, A. Health economic evaluations: How to find them. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:512–517.
13. Sassi, F, Archard, L, McDaid, D. Searching literature databases for health care economic evaluations: How systematic can we afford to be? Med Care. 2002;40:387–394.
14. Gibson, PG, Powell, H, Coughlan, J, et al. Self-management education and regular practitioner review for adults with asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003:CD001117.
15. Jones, F, Riazi, A. Self-efficacy and self-management after stroke: A systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:797–810.
16. Newman, S, Steed, L, Mulligan, K. Self-management interventions for chronic illness. Lancet. 2004;364:1523–1537.
17. Evers, SM, Van Wijk, AS, Ament, AJ. Economic evaluation of mental health care interventions. A review. Health Econ. 1997;6:161–177.
18. Higgins, JPT, Green, S (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2009. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
19. Odnoletkova, I, Goderis, G, Lore, P, et al. Systematic review on the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic education to prevent the development and progression of type 2 diabetes. Value Health. 2013;16:452.
20. Evers, S, Goossens, M, de Vet, H, van Tulder, M, Ament, A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on health economic criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:240–245.
21. Bourbeau, J, Collet, J-P, Schwartzman, K, et al. Economic benefits of self-management education in COPD. Chest. 2006;130:1704–1711.
22. Cline, C, Israelsson, B, Willenheimer, R, Broms, K, Erhardt, L. Cost effective management programme for heart failure reduces hospitalisation. Heart. 1998;80:442–446.
23. Gallefoss, F, Bakke, P. Cost-effectiveness of self-management in asthmatics: A 1-yr follow-up randomized, controlled trial. Eur Respir J. 2001;17:206–213.
24. Gillett, M, Dallosso, H, Dixon, S, et al. Delivering the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (desmond) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: Cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2010;341:c4093.
25. Handley, MA, Shumway, M, Schillinger, D. Cost-effectiveness of automated telephone self-management support with nurse care management among patients with diabetes. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6:512–518.
26. Jansa, M, Vidal, M, Viaplana, J, et al. Telecare in a structured therapeutic education programme addressed to patients with type 1 diabetes and poor metabolic control. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2006;74:26–32.
27. Jowett, S, Bryan, S, Murray, E, et al. Patient self-management of anticoagulation therapy: A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis. Br J Haematol. 2006;134:632–639.
28. Kauppinen, R, Sintonen, H, Tukiainen, H. One-year economic evaluation of intensive vs conventional patient education and supervision for self-management of new asthmatic patients. Respir Med. 1998;92:300–307.
29. Kauppinen, R, Vilkka, V, Sintonen, H, Klaukka, T, Tukiainen, H. Long-term economic evaluation of intensive patient education during the first treatment year in newly diagnosed adult asthma. Respir Med. 2001;95:56–63.
30. Khdour, MR, Agus, AM, Kidney, JC, et al. Cost-utility analysis of a pharmacy-led self-management programme for patients with COPD. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:665–673.
31. Latimer, NR, Dixon, S, Palmer, R. Cost-utility of self-managed computer therapy for people with aphasia. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29:402–409.
32. McLean, W, Gillis, J, Waller, R. The bc community pharmacy asthma study: A study of clinical, economic and holistic outcomes influenced by an asthma care protocol provided by specially trained community pharmacists in british columbia. Can Respir J. 2003;10:195–202.
33. van der Meer, V, van den Hout, WB, Bakker, MJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of internet-based self-management compared with usual care in asthma. PLoS One. 2011;6:e27108.
34. Moss-Morris, R, McCrone, P, Yardley, L, et al. A pilot randomised controlled trial of an internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy self-management programme (ms invigor8) for multiple sclerosis fatigue. Behav Res Ther. 2012;50:415–421.
35. van Os-Medendorp, H, Koffijberg, H, Eland-de Kok, PC, et al. E-health in caring for patients with atopic dermatitis: A randomized controlled cost-effectiveness study of internet-guided monitoring and online self-management training. Br J Dermatol. 2012;166:1060–1068.
36. Patel, A, Buszewicz, M, Beecham, J, et al. Economic evaluation of arthritis self management in primary care. BMJ. 2009;339:b3532.
37. Reed, SD, Li, Y, Oddone, EZ, et al. Economic evaluation of home blood pressure monitoring with or without telephonic behavioral self-management in patients with hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 2010;23:142–148.
38. Richardson, G, Epstein, D, Chew-Graham, C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of supported self-management for cfs/me patients in primary care. BMC Fam Pract. 2013;14:12.
39. Ritzwoller, DP, Sukhanova, AS, Glasgow, RE, et al. Intervention costs and cost-effectiveness for a multiple-risk-factor diabetes self-management trial for Latinas: Economic analysis of viva bien! Transl Behav Med. 2011;1:427–435.
40. Robinson, A, Lee, V, Kennedy, A, et al. A randomised controlled trial of self-help interventions in patients with a primary care diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome. Gut. 2006;55:643–648.
41. Schermer, TR, Thoonen, BP, van den Boom, G, et al. Randomized controlled economic evaluation of asthma self-management in primary health care. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166:1062–1072.
42. Strong, LL, Von Korff, M, Saunders, K, Moore, JE. Cost-effectiveness of two self-care interventions to reduce disability associated with back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31:1639–1645.
43. Wang, V, Smith, VA, Bosworth, HB, et al. Economic evaluation of telephone self-management interventions for blood pressure control. Am Heart J. 2012;163:980–986.
44. Hurley, MV, Walsh, NE, Mitchell, HL, et al. Economic evaluation of a rehabilitation program integrating exercise, self-management, and active coping strategies for chronic knee pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1220–1229.
45. Nolte, S, Osborne, RH. A systematic review of outcomes of chronic disease self-management interventions. Qual Life Res. 2012;22:1805–1816.
46. Dorn, S. Systematic review: Self-management support interventions for irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010;32:513–521.
47. Husereau, D, Drummond, M, Petrou, S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29:117–122.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *

CAPTCHA *

Skip to the audio challenge
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

van Eeden supplementary material
Table S1

 Unknown (416 KB)
416 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Eeden supplementary material
Figure S2

 Word (29 KB)
29 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

van Eeden supplementary material
Table S2

 Unknown (348 KB)
348 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Eeden supplementary material
Figure S1

 Word (26 KB)
26 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 27
Total number of PDF views: 290 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 464 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 13th June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Cancel
Confirm
×