Certified service dogs – A cost-effectiveness analysis appraisal
Autoři:
Martina Lundqvist aff001; Jenny Alwin aff001; Lars-Åke Levin aff001
Působiště autorů:
Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linkoping University, Linköping, Sweden
aff001
Vyšlo v časopise:
PLoS ONE 14(9)
Kategorie:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219911
Souhrn
Introduction
Individuals with functional impairments or chronic diseases are often in need of assistance in their daily lives. For these individuals it is essential to find novel, cost-effective solutions to meet their needs. Service dogs are dogs that are specially trained to assist individuals with functional impairments and may be able to improve these individuals’ quality of life at a reasonable cost, i.e. be cost effective. Cost-effectiveness analyses are used to illustrate the cost of an intervention in relation to its effects and provide important input to decision-makers when setting priorities.
Aim
The aim of this study is to assess the cost effectiveness of a certified physical service dog and a diabetes alert dog compared to a regular companion dog.
Method
Costs, life years and quality-adjusted life years were estimated over a 10-year time horizon using a decision-analytic model built upon evidence from the”service and hearing dog project”. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as cost per gained quality-adjusted life year. The analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. Costs and effects were discounted with 3% per annum and reported in USD.
Results
Compared to a regular companion dog, a physical service dog is cost saving [-6,000 USD] and gives the dog owner more quality-adjusted life years [0.28]. The diabetes alert dog is also cost effective in comparison with a regular companion dog [-4,500 USD, 0.06 QALYs].
Conclusion
This study indicates that a certified service dog is cost saving in comparison with a regular companion dog for individuals with functional impairments or chronic diseases. The uncertainty of the analysis implies that further studies are needed in order to confirm these results. Nevertheless, physical service dogs and diabetes alert dogs show potential to be a valuable support and decision analytic models are useful tools to provide this information.
Klíčová slova:
Biology and life sciences – Organisms – Eukaryota – Animals – Vertebrates – Amniotes – Mammals – Dogs – Animal types – Pets and companion animals – Zoology – Medicine and health sciences – Endocrinology – Endocrine disorders – Metabolic disorders – Health care – Health economics – Health care providers – Medical doctors – Physicians – Social sciences – Economics – Economic analysis – Cost-effectiveness analysis – People and places – Geographical locations – Europe – European Union – Sweden – Population groupings – Professions – Medical personnel – Physical sciences – Mathematics – Probability theory – Markov models
Zdroje
1. McPhail SM. Multimorbidity in chronic disease: impact on health care resources and costs. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy. 2016;9: 143–156. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S97248 27462182
2. Assistance Dogs International. Types of Assistance Dogs. Available from: https://www.assistancedogsinternational.org/about-us/types-of-assistance-dogs.
3. The Swedish Kennel Club. Assistenthund som hjälpmedel [In Swedish]. Available from: https://www.skk.se/sv/hundagande/fokus-pa/assistanshundar/vad-ar-en-assistanshund/.
4. The Swedish Association of Service Dogs. Service- och signalhundsförbundets assistanshundar [In Swedish]. Available from: http://www.soshund.se/servicehund_a/.
5. Lundqvist M, Levin L-Å, Roback K, Alwin J. The impact of service and hearing dogs on health-related quality of life and activity level: a Swedish longitudinal intervention study. BMC Health Services Research. 2018;18: 497. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3014-0 29945630
6. Södra regionvårdsnämnaden. Regionala priser och ersättningar för Södra sjukvårdsregionen 2017. Available from: http://sodrasjukvardsregionen.se/avtal-priser/regionala-priser-och-ersattningar-foregaende-ar/.
7. Sydöstra Sjukvårdsregionen. Priser och ersättningar för Sydöstra sjukvårdsregionen 2017. Available from: https://plus.rjl.se/info_files/infosida41089/prislista_2017_slutversion_10_0.pdf.
8. Swedish Statistics (SCB). Average monthly salary, gender and year [Dataset]. Available from: http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__AM__AM0110__AM0110B/LoneSpridSektorYrkA/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=7f178888-a00e-4e65-b38d-ca80424de359.
9. Johannesson M, Borgquist L, Jonsson B, Rastam L. The costs of treating hypertension—an analysis of different cut-off points. Health Policy. 1991;18: 141–50. 10112585
10. European Commission Eurostat. Hourly labour costs. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Hourly_labour_costs.
11. Dolan P. Modeling Valuations for EuroQol Health States. Medical care. 1997;35: 1095–108. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002 9366889
12. Swedish Statistics (SCB). Lifetime table 2010–2014, divided into men and women [Dataset]. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:bfeK03iqj3oJ:www.scb.se/Statistik/BE/BE0101/2014A01G/Be0101Livslangdstabeller-14.xlsx+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=seAccessed June 14, 2017.
13. Egenvall A, Bonnett BN, Hedhammar A, Olson P. Mortality in over 350,000 insured Swedish dogs from 1995–2000: II. Breed-specific age and survival patterns and relative risk for causes of death. Acta Vet Scand. 2005;46: 121–36. doi: 10.1186/1751-0147-46-121 16261925
14. Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, Briggs A, Akehurst R, Buxton M. et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Economics. 2005;339. doi: 10.1002/hec.985 15736142
15. Fenwick E, O'Brien BJ, Briggs A. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves—Facts, fallacies and frequently asked questions. Health Economics. 2004;13: 405–415. doi: 10.1002/hec.903 15127421
16. Corp IBM. Released 2015., IBM SPSS for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
17. Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, Brown R, Buxton M, Chawla A. et al. Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. Value Health. 2005;8: 521–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00045.x 16176491
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 9
- Pomohou nám s detekcí karcinomu plic i včely?
- Duševní onemocnění se u teenagerů přenáší v rámci školní třídy
- Od kostiček k lidské kůži. Jak si postavit 3D biotiskárnu?
- Řekněte mi, co jíte, a já vám řeknu, jaká je úroveň vaší kognice
- Umělá inteligence v mozkovém implantátu pomáhá muži po mrtvici s dvojjazyčnou konverzací
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
- Graviola (Annona muricata) attenuates behavioural alterations and testicular oxidative stress induced by streptozotocin in diabetic rats
- CH(II), a cerebroprotein hydrolysate, exhibits potential neuro-protective effect on Alzheimer’s disease
- Comparison between Aptima Assays (Hologic) and the Allplex STI Essential Assay (Seegene) for the diagnosis of Sexually transmitted infections
- Assessment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity using CareStart G6PD rapid diagnostic test and associated genetic variants in Plasmodium vivax malaria endemic setting in Mauritania
Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova
Všechny kurzy