perspective, with 15 months’ time horizon.
Methods: Treatment-naïve, and treatment-experienced patients at-risk for viral rebound were randomized to treatment-as-usual (TAU) or AIMS in a multi-center randomized controlled trial, in the Netherlands. AIMS is a nurse-led, 1-on-1 self-management intervention incorporating feedback from electronic medication monitors, delivered during routine clinical visits. Main outcomes were costs per reduction in log10 viral load, treatment failure (two consecutive detectable viral loads), and qualityadjusted life years.
Results: 223 patients were randomized. From a societal perspective, AIMS was slightly more expensive than TAU but also more effective, resulting in an ICER of €549 per reduction in log10 viral load and €1,659 per percentage decrease in treatment failure. In terms of QALYs, AIMS resulted in higher costs but more QALYs compared to TAU, which resulted in an ICER of €27,759 per QALY gained. From a healthcare perspective, AIMS dominated TAU. Additional sensitivity analyses addressing key limitations of the base case analyses also suggested that AIMS dominates TAU.
Conclusions: The base case analyses suggests that over a period of 15 months, AIMS may be costlier, but also more effective than TAU. All additional analyses suggest that AIMS is cheaper and more effective than TAU. This trial-based economic evaluation confirms and complements a model-based economic evaluation with a life-time horizon showing that AIMS is cost-effective.
- cost effectiveness
- VIRAL LOAD
- FORM HEALTH SURVEY
- TREATMENT OUTCOMES
- HIV-INFECTED PATIENTS
- ACTIVE ANTIRETROVIRAL THERAPY
- MEDICATION ADHERENCE