Is shared care with annual hospital review better value for money than predominantly hospital-based care in patients with established stable rheumatoid arthritis?

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness and cost effectiveness acceptability of symptom control delivered by shared care (SCSC) and aggressive treatment delivered in hospital (ATH) for established rheumatoid arthritis ( RA). Methods: Economic data were collected within the British Rheumatoid Outcome Study Group randomised controlled trial of SCSC and ATH. A broad perspective was used (UK National Health Service, social support services and patients). Cost per quality adjusted life year ( QALY) gained, net benefit statistics and cost effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. Sensitivity analysis tested the robustness of the results to analytical assumptions. Results: The mean (SD) cost per person was 4540 pound ( 4700) in the SCSC group and 4440 pound ( 4900) in the ATH group. The mean ( SD) QALYs per person for 3 years were 1.67 (0.56) in the SCSC group and 1.60 (0.60) in the ATH group. If decision makers are prepared to pay >= 2000 pound to gain 1 QALY, SCSC is likely to be cost effective in 60-90% of cases. Conclusions: The primary economic analysis and sensitivity analyses indicate that SCSC is likely to be more cost effective than ATH in 60-90% of cases. This result seems to be robust to assumptions required by the analysis. This study is one of a limited number of randomised controlled trials to collect detailed resource use and health status data and estimate the costs and QALYs of treatment for established RA. This trial is one of the largest RA studies to use the EuroQol.