Limits...
Clinical and cost effectiveness of booklet based vestibular rehabilitation for chronic dizziness in primary care: single blind, parallel group, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Yardley L, Barker F, Muller I, Turner D, Kirby S, Mullee M, Morris A, Little P - BMJ (2012)

Bottom Line: At 12 weeks, scores on the vertigo symptom scale in the telephone support group did not differ significantly from those in the routine care group (adjusted mean difference -1.79 (95% confidence interval -3.69 to 0.11), P=0.064).At one year, both intervention groups improved significantly relative to routine care (telephone support -2.52 (-4.52 to -0.51), P=0.014; booklet only -2.43 (-4.27 to -0.60), P=0.010).Analysis of cost effectiveness acceptability curves showed that both interventions were highly cost effective; at very low QALY values, the booklet only approach was most likely to be cost effective, but the approach with additional telephone support was most likely to be cost effective at QALY values more than £1200 (€1488; $1932).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK. L.Yardley@soton.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of booklet based vestibular rehabilitation with and without telephone support for chronic dizziness, compared with routine care.

Design: Single blind, parallel group, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 35 general practices across southern England between October 2008 and January 2011.

Participants: Patients aged 18 years or over with chronic dizziness (mean duration >five years) not attributable to non-vestibular causes (confirmed by general practitioner) and that could be aggravated by head movement (confirmed by patient).

Interventions: Participants randomly allocated to receive routine medical care, booklet based vestibular rehabilitation only, or booklet based vestibular rehabilitation with telephone support. For the booklet approach, participants received self management booklets providing comprehensive advice on undertaking vestibular rehabilitation exercises at home daily for up to 12 weeks and using cognitive behavioural techniques to promote positive beliefs and treatment adherence. Participants receiving telephone support were offered up to three brief sessions of structured support from a vestibular therapist.

Main outcome measures: Vertigo symptom scale-short form and total healthcare costs related to dizziness per quality adjusted life year (QALY).

Results: Of 337 randomised participants, 276 (82%) completed all clinical measures at the primary endpoint, 12 weeks, and 263 (78%) at one year follow-up. We analysed clinical effectiveness by intention to treat, using analysis of covariance to compare groups after intervention, controlling for baseline symptom scores. At 12 weeks, scores on the vertigo symptom scale in the telephone support group did not differ significantly from those in the routine care group (adjusted mean difference -1.79 (95% confidence interval -3.69 to 0.11), P=0.064). At one year, both intervention groups improved significantly relative to routine care (telephone support -2.52 (-4.52 to -0.51), P=0.014; booklet only -2.43 (-4.27 to -0.60), P=0.010). Analysis of cost effectiveness acceptability curves showed that both interventions were highly cost effective; at very low QALY values, the booklet only approach was most likely to be cost effective, but the approach with additional telephone support was most likely to be cost effective at QALY values more than £1200 (€1488; $1932). Using the booklet approach with telephone support, five (three to 12) patients would need to be treated for one patient to report subjective improvement at one year.

Conclusions: Booklet based vestibular rehabilitation for chronic dizziness is a simple and cost effective means of improving patient reported outcomes in primary care.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00732797.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Fig 2 Pattern of subjective improvement at one year follow-up
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3368486&req=5

fig2: Fig 2 Pattern of subjective improvement at one year follow-up

Mentions: Subjective improvement was also reported by a larger proportion of the treatment groups than the routine care group, at both 12 week and one year follow-up (tables 2 and 3). For the primary comparison between booklet self management with telephone support and routine care, the point estimate for the absolute difference of 22.0% (95% confidence interval 7.3% to 36.8%) indicated that five (three to 12) patients would need to be treated for one patient to report subjective improvement at one year. More detailed examination of the pattern of subjective improvement indicated that 57 (60%) of 95 patients randomised to booklet self management with telephone support reported feeling much better or completely well at one year, compared with 33 (33%) of 99 in the usual care group (fig 2). Fewer patients in this group (five (5%) of 95) than in the usual care group (15 (15%) of 99) reported worse symptoms at one year follow-up; outcomes for the group allocated to receive booklet self management only were intermediate.


Clinical and cost effectiveness of booklet based vestibular rehabilitation for chronic dizziness in primary care: single blind, parallel group, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Yardley L, Barker F, Muller I, Turner D, Kirby S, Mullee M, Morris A, Little P - BMJ (2012)

Fig 2 Pattern of subjective improvement at one year follow-up
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3368486&req=5

fig2: Fig 2 Pattern of subjective improvement at one year follow-up
Mentions: Subjective improvement was also reported by a larger proportion of the treatment groups than the routine care group, at both 12 week and one year follow-up (tables 2 and 3). For the primary comparison between booklet self management with telephone support and routine care, the point estimate for the absolute difference of 22.0% (95% confidence interval 7.3% to 36.8%) indicated that five (three to 12) patients would need to be treated for one patient to report subjective improvement at one year. More detailed examination of the pattern of subjective improvement indicated that 57 (60%) of 95 patients randomised to booklet self management with telephone support reported feeling much better or completely well at one year, compared with 33 (33%) of 99 in the usual care group (fig 2). Fewer patients in this group (five (5%) of 95) than in the usual care group (15 (15%) of 99) reported worse symptoms at one year follow-up; outcomes for the group allocated to receive booklet self management only were intermediate.

Bottom Line: At 12 weeks, scores on the vertigo symptom scale in the telephone support group did not differ significantly from those in the routine care group (adjusted mean difference -1.79 (95% confidence interval -3.69 to 0.11), P=0.064).At one year, both intervention groups improved significantly relative to routine care (telephone support -2.52 (-4.52 to -0.51), P=0.014; booklet only -2.43 (-4.27 to -0.60), P=0.010).Analysis of cost effectiveness acceptability curves showed that both interventions were highly cost effective; at very low QALY values, the booklet only approach was most likely to be cost effective, but the approach with additional telephone support was most likely to be cost effective at QALY values more than £1200 (€1488; $1932).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK. L.Yardley@soton.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of booklet based vestibular rehabilitation with and without telephone support for chronic dizziness, compared with routine care.

Design: Single blind, parallel group, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 35 general practices across southern England between October 2008 and January 2011.

Participants: Patients aged 18 years or over with chronic dizziness (mean duration >five years) not attributable to non-vestibular causes (confirmed by general practitioner) and that could be aggravated by head movement (confirmed by patient).

Interventions: Participants randomly allocated to receive routine medical care, booklet based vestibular rehabilitation only, or booklet based vestibular rehabilitation with telephone support. For the booklet approach, participants received self management booklets providing comprehensive advice on undertaking vestibular rehabilitation exercises at home daily for up to 12 weeks and using cognitive behavioural techniques to promote positive beliefs and treatment adherence. Participants receiving telephone support were offered up to three brief sessions of structured support from a vestibular therapist.

Main outcome measures: Vertigo symptom scale-short form and total healthcare costs related to dizziness per quality adjusted life year (QALY).

Results: Of 337 randomised participants, 276 (82%) completed all clinical measures at the primary endpoint, 12 weeks, and 263 (78%) at one year follow-up. We analysed clinical effectiveness by intention to treat, using analysis of covariance to compare groups after intervention, controlling for baseline symptom scores. At 12 weeks, scores on the vertigo symptom scale in the telephone support group did not differ significantly from those in the routine care group (adjusted mean difference -1.79 (95% confidence interval -3.69 to 0.11), P=0.064). At one year, both intervention groups improved significantly relative to routine care (telephone support -2.52 (-4.52 to -0.51), P=0.014; booklet only -2.43 (-4.27 to -0.60), P=0.010). Analysis of cost effectiveness acceptability curves showed that both interventions were highly cost effective; at very low QALY values, the booklet only approach was most likely to be cost effective, but the approach with additional telephone support was most likely to be cost effective at QALY values more than £1200 (€1488; $1932). Using the booklet approach with telephone support, five (three to 12) patients would need to be treated for one patient to report subjective improvement at one year.

Conclusions: Booklet based vestibular rehabilitation for chronic dizziness is a simple and cost effective means of improving patient reported outcomes in primary care.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00732797.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus