Why the study?
Does the addition of the REACH-HF intervention and home-based cardiac rehabilitation to usual care improve cost-effectiveness in patients with HFrEF?
Does the addition of the REACH-HF intervention and home-based cardiac rehabilitation to usual care improve cost-effectiveness in patients with HFrEF?
REACH-HF and home-based cardiac rehabilitation are cost-effective additions to usual care for patients with HFrEF.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support REACH-HF and home-based rehabilitation as cost-effective HFrEF options; leaves open confirmation in prospective trials.
Our cost-utility analyses indicate that the addition of the REACH-HF intervention and home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are likely to be cost-effective treatment options versus usual care alone in patients with HFrEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Taylor et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: