Scholarlink

Objectives <p>Chronic kidney disease and its most severe complication, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), represents an estimated financial burden of €4.4&#xa0;billion in 2021 in France. Therapeutic patient education (TPE) improves ESRD management and health outcomes. This study explored whether providing access to an interactive web-based TPE platform with community features was cost-effective.</p> Methods <p>A within-trial cost-utility analysis was carried out over an 18 months horizon, using data from the PIC-R (<i>Plateforme Interactive Communautaire—dialyse et transplantation Rénale</i>) trial. ESRD or post-transplant patients were randomized 1:1:1 to a control group with no specific TPE program (Control), an intervention group with online TPE (e-TPE) and an intervention group with online TPE coupled with community features such as a patient forum and a chatroom with both patients and health care professionals (e-TPE + chat). The outcome measure was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and per year of full capability (YFC). Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were conducted, and missing data were handled using multiple imputation and selection models. Sensitivity analyses were performed.</p> Results <p>Among the 815 patients assessed for eligibility across 12 French centres, a total of 549 patients were included in the economic analysis: 186 in the Control group, 189 in the e-TPE group and 174 in the e-TPE + chat group. The e-TPE group demonstrated cost savings and slightly higher QALYs compared to the control group, making e-TPE dominant. Conversely, the e-TPE + chat intervention resulted in higher costs without substantial effectiveness gains, making it not cost-effective.</p> Conclusions <p>e-TPE was deemed cost-effective for ESRD patients, while e-TPE + chat was not. Web-based platforms improve ESRD management when targeted to likely users.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cost-utility analysis of a web-based interactive patient education platform: evidence from a randomized clinical trial for end-stage renal disease patients

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月25日

查看全文
  • Modou Diop,
  • Lionel Perrier,
  • Baptiste Haon,
  • Lise Rochaix,
  • Luc Behaghel,
  • Jean-Claude K. Dupont,
  • Magali Morelle,
  • Michelle Elias,
  • Laure Esposito,
  • Christophe Legendre,
  • Hélène Longuet,
  • Isabelle Durand-Zaleski,
  • Evangéline Pillebout,
  • Benoit Barrou,
  • Jean-Jacques Boffa,
  • Arnaud Delbello,
  • Gauthier Flahaut,
  • Magali Giral,
  • Caroline Gourraud-Vercel,
  • Anne Grall-Jezequel,
  • Aurélie Houzet-Meurette,
  • Nassim Kamar,
  • Yannick Le Meur,
  • Camille Petit-Hoang,
  • Eric Thervet,
  • Leïla Tricot

摘要

Objectives

Chronic kidney disease and its most severe complication, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), represents an estimated financial burden of €4.4 billion in 2021 in France. Therapeutic patient education (TPE) improves ESRD management and health outcomes. This study explored whether providing access to an interactive web-based TPE platform with community features was cost-effective.

Methods

A within-trial cost-utility analysis was carried out over an 18 months horizon, using data from the PIC-R (Plateforme Interactive Communautaire—dialyse et transplantation Rénale) trial. ESRD or post-transplant patients were randomized 1:1:1 to a control group with no specific TPE program (Control), an intervention group with online TPE (e-TPE) and an intervention group with online TPE coupled with community features such as a patient forum and a chatroom with both patients and health care professionals (e-TPE + chat). The outcome measure was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and per year of full capability (YFC). Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were conducted, and missing data were handled using multiple imputation and selection models. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

Among the 815 patients assessed for eligibility across 12 French centres, a total of 549 patients were included in the economic analysis: 186 in the Control group, 189 in the e-TPE group and 174 in the e-TPE + chat group. The e-TPE group demonstrated cost savings and slightly higher QALYs compared to the control group, making e-TPE dominant. Conversely, the e-TPE + chat intervention resulted in higher costs without substantial effectiveness gains, making it not cost-effective.

Conclusions

e-TPE was deemed cost-effective for ESRD patients, while e-TPE + chat was not. Web-based platforms improve ESRD management when targeted to likely users.