Key result
The 12-month home-based TeGeCoach program did not significantly reduce health care use or total health care costs (difference of -352€ in the first year) in patients with peripheral artery disease.
Why the study?
Clear consensus on the most beneficial components of home-based exercise programs for peripheral artery disease is lacking, despite significant global prevalence and health-economic burden.
Does a 12-month telephone health coaching and remote exercise monitoring program reduce health care use and costs in patients with peripheral artery disease?
RCT (n=1,685)
Open-label
1:1 ratio, permuted block method
Yes
Does a 12-month telephone health coaching and remote exercise monitoring program reduce health care use and costs in patients with peripheral artery disease?
Mean Difference: -352
p-value: p=not significant
A 12-month telephone health coaching and remote exercise monitoring program did not significantly reduce health care utilization or costs in patients with peripheral artery disease.
TeGeCoach showed no significant cost savings; leaves open whether refined home-based programs can reduce utilization in PAD.
BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is the third most prevalent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In 2016, costs per patient associated with PAD exceeded even the health-economic burden of coronary heart disease. Although affecting over 200 million people worldwide, a clear consensus on the most beneficial components to be included in home-based exercise programs for patients with peripheral artery disease is lacking. The aim of the study was to examine the health care use and costs caused by the 12-month patient-centered 'Telephone Health Coaching and Remote Exercise Monitoring for Peripheral Artery Disease' (TeGeCoach) program in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This is a two-arm, parallel-group, open-label, pragmatic, randomized, controlled clinical trial (TeGeCoach) at three German statutory health insurance funds with follow-up assessments after 12 and 24-months. Study outcomes were medication use (daily defined doses), days in hospital, sick pay days and health care costs, from the health insurers' perspective. Claims data from the participating health insurers were used for analyses. The main analytic approach was an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Other approaches (modified ITT, per protocol, and as treated) were executed additionally as sensitivity analysis. Random-effects regression models were calculated to determine difference-in-difference (DD) estimators for the first- and the second year of follow-up. Additionally, existing differences at baseline between both groups were treated with entropy balancing to check for the stability of the calculated estimators. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred eighty-five patients (Intervention group (IG) = 806; Control group (CG) = 879) were finally included in ITT analyses. The analyses showed non-significant effects of the intervention on savings (first year: - 352€; second year: - 215€). Sensitivity analyses confirmed primary results and showed even larger savings. CONCLUSION: Based on health insurance claims data, a significant reduction due to the home-based TeGeCoach program could not be found for health care use and costs in patients with PAD. Nevertheless, in all sensitivity analysis a tendency became apparent for a non-significant cost reducing effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03496948 (www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov), initial release on 23 March 2018.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heider et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Peripheral artery disease (n=1,685). TeGeCoach (Telephone Health Coaching and Remote Exercise Monitoring) vs. Care as usual was evaluated on Total health care costs in the first year (MD -352€, p=not significant). The 12-month home-based TeGeCoach program did not significantly reduce health care use or total health care costs (difference of -352€ in the first year) in patients with peripheral artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: