Protocol for an economic evaluation of a tele-neurologic intervention alongside a stepped wedge randomised controlled trial (NeTKoH)

Abstract

Background A significant and growing portion of the global burden of diseases is caused by neurological disorders. Tele-neurology has the potential to improve access to health care services and the quality of care, particularly in rural and underserved areas. The economic evaluation of the stepped wedge randomised controlled trial NeTKoH aims to ascertain the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility regarding the effects of a tele-neurologic intervention in primary care in a rural area in Germany. Methods This protocol outlines the methods used when conducting the trial-based economic evaluation of NeTKoH. The outcomes used in our economic analysis are all prespecified endpoints of the NeTKoH trial. Outcomes considered for the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses will be quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from the EQ-5D-5L, proportion of neurologic problems being solved at the GP’s office (primary outcome), hospital length-of-stay and number of hospital stays. Costs will be prospectively collected during the trial by the participating statutory health insurances, and will be analysed from a statutory health insurance perspective within the German health care system. This economic evaluation will be reported complying with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Discussion This within-trial economic evaluation relaying the costs and outcomes of an interdisciplinary tele-consulting intervention will provide high-quality evidence for cost-effectiveness and policy implications of a tele-neurological programme, including the potential for application in other rural areas in Germany or other jurisdictions with a comparable health system. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00024492), date registered: September 28, 2021.

Protocol for a trial-based economic evaluation analysis of a complex digital health intervention including a computerised decision support tool: the iFraP intervention

“…To explore the decision uncertainty associated with the cost-effectiveness of iFraP to enhance bisphosphonate adherence we will conduct a VoI analysis. An electronic search of trial-based economic evaluation of digital health interventions study protocols identified only three study protocols and neither of these included a trial based VoI analysis [42][43][44] . No VoI analysis was found when searching the published literature for protocols of cost-effectiveness analyses of digital support tools.…”