PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Cost-effectiveness of a non-pharmacological treatment vs. “care as usual” in day care centers for community-dwelling older people with cognitive impairment: Results from the German randomized controlled DeTaMAKS-trial.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Steinbeisser, K. ; Schwarzkopf, L. ; Graessel, E.* ; Seidl, H.

Cost-effectiveness of a non-pharmacological treatment vs. “care as usual” in day care centers for community-dwelling older people with cognitive impairment: Results from the German randomized controlled DeTaMAKS-trial.

Eur. J. Health Econ. 21, 825–844 (2020)

Postprint

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Green

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

Background: Cognitive impairment in older adults causes a high economic and societal burden. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of the multicomponent, non-pharmacological MAKS treatment vs. “care as usual” in German day care centers (DCCs) for community-dwelling people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild to moderate dementia over 6 months. Methods: The analysis was conducted from the societal perspective alongside the cluster-randomized controlled, multicenter, prospective DeTaMAKS-trial with waitlist group design. Outcomes were Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) and Erlangen Test of Activities of Daily Living in Persons with Mild Dementia or Mild Cognitive Impairment (ETAM) of 433 individuals in 32 DCCs. Incremental differences in MMSE and ETAM were calculated via a Gaussian-distributed and incremental cost difference via a Gamma-distributed Generalized Linear Model. Cost-effectiveness was assessed via cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEAC). Results: At 6 months, MMSE (adjusted mean difference = 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.17 to 1.67; p = 0.02) and ETAM (adjusted mean difference = 1.00; CI: 0.14 to 1.85; p = 0.02) were significantly better in the intervention group. The adjusted cost difference was − €938.50 (CI: − 2733.65 to 763.13; p = 0.31). Given the CEAC, MAKS was cost-effective for 78.0% of MMSE and 77.4% for ETAM without a need for additional costs to payers. Conclusions: MAKS is a cost-effective treatment to stabilize the ability to perform activities of daily living and cognitive abilities of people with MCI or mild to moderate dementia in German DCCs. Thus, MAKS should be implemented in DCCs.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

2.367

1.213