Background: Falls are a major cause of morbidity among older people. Multifaceted interventions may be effective in preventing falls and related fractures. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness alongside the REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) trial. Methods: REFORM was a pragmatic multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial in England and Ireland; 1,010 participants (> 65 years) were randomised to receive either a podiatry intervention (n = 493), including foot and ankle strengthening exercises, foot orthoses, new footwear if required, and a falls prevention leaflet, or usual podiatry treatment plus a falls prevention leaflet (n = 517). Primary outcome: incidence of falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. Secondary outcomes: proportion of fallers and quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) which was converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each participant. Differences in mean costs and QALYs at 12 months were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted in accordance with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence reference case standards, using a regression-based approach with costs expressed in GBP (2015 price). The base case analysis used an intention-to-treat approach on the imputed data set using multiple imputation. Results: There was a small, non-statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.73–1.05, p = 0.16). Participants allocated to the intervention group accumulated on average marginally higher QALYs than the usual care participants (mean difference 0.0129, 95% CI –0.0050 to 0.0314). The intervention costs were on average GBP 252 more per participant compared to the usual care participants (95% CI GBP –69 to GBP 589). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between GBP 19,494 and GBP 20,593 per QALY gained, below the conventional National Health Service cost-effectiveness thresholds of GBP 20,000 to GBP 30,000 per additional QALY. The probability that the podiatry intervention is cost-effective at a threshold of GBP 30,000 per QALY gained was 0.65. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: The benefits of the intervention justified the moderate cost. The intervention could be a cost-effective option for falls prevention when compared with usual care in the UK.

Keywords:
Elderly, Falls, Footwear, Quality of life, Shoes, Podiatry intervention, Decision making, Cost-effectiveness
1.
Gill T, Taylor AW, Pengelly A: A population-based survey of factors relating to the prevalence of falls in older people. Gerontology 2005; 51: 340–345.
2.
Iglesias C, Manca A, Torgerson D: The health-related quality of life and cost implications of falls in elderly women. Osteoporos Int 2009; 20: 869–878.
3.
Prudham D, Evans JG: Factors associated with falls in the elderly: a community study. Age Ageing 1981; 10: 141–146.
4.
Tian Y, Thompson J, D. Buck D, Sonola L: Exploring the System-Wide Costs of Falls in Older People in Torbay. London, The King’s Fund, 2013.
5.
Menz HB, Morris ME, Lord SR: Foot and ankle risk factors for falls in older people: a prospective study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2006; 61: 866–870.
6.
Mickle KJ, Munro BJ, Lord SR, Menz HB, Steele JR: Foot pain, plantar pressures, and falls in older people: a prospective study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010; 58: 1936–1940.
7.
Hatton AL, Rome K, Dixon J, Martin DJ, McKeon PO: Footwear interventions: a review of their sensorimotor and mechanical effects on balance performance and gait in older adults. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2013; 103: 516–533.
8.
Spink MJ, Menz HB, Fotoohabadi MR, Wee E, Landorf KB, Hill KD, Lord SR: Effectiveness of a multifaceted podiatry intervention to prevent falls in community dwelling older people with disabling foot pain: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2011; 342:d3411.
9.
Cockayne S, Adamson J, Clarke A, Corbacho B, Fairhurst C, Green L, Hewitt CE, Hicks K, Kenan AM, Lamb SE, et al: Cohort randomised controlled trial of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for the prevention of falls in older people (the REFORM Trial). PLoS One 2017; 12:e0168712.
10.
Claxton K: The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999; 18: 341–364.
11.
Relton C, Torgerson D, O’Cathain A, Nicholl J: Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the “cohort multiple randomised controlled trial” design. BMJ 2010; 340:c1066.
12.
Cockayne S, Adamson J, Martin BC, Fairhurst C, Hewitt C, Hicks K, Hull R, Keenan AM, Lamb SE, Loughrey L: The REFORM study protocol: a cohort randomised controlled trial of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for the prevention of falls in older people. BMJ Open 2014; 4:e006977.
13.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London, NICE, 2013.
14.
Manca A, Palmer S: Handling missing data in patient-level cost-effectiveness analysis alongside randomised clinical trials. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2005; 4: 65–75.
15.
Lamb SE, Jørstad-Stein EC, Hauer K, Becker C: Development of a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention trials: the prevention of falls network Europe consensus. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53: 1618–1622.
16.
Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A: A Social Tariff for EuroQol: Results from a UK General Population Survey. Centre for Health Economics University of York, UK, 1995.
17.
Billingham L, Abrams KR, Jones DR: Methods for the analysis of quality-of-life and survival data in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess 1998; 3: 1–152.
18.
Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ: Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ 2005; 14: 487–496.
19.
Little RJ, Rubin DB: The analysis of social science data with missing values. Sociol Methods Res 1989; 18: 292–326.
20.
Carlin JB, Galati JC, Royston P: A new framework for managing and analyzing multiply imputed data in Stata. Stata J 2008; 8: 49–67.
21.
White IR, Royston P, Wood AM: Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med 2011; 30: 377–399.
22.
Rubin DB: Multiple Imputation for NonreSponse in Surveys. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
23.
Van Buuren S, Boshuizen HC, Knook DL: Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Stat Med 1999; 18: 681–694.
24.
Faria R, Gomes M, Epstein D, White IR: A guide to handling missing data in cost-effectiveness analysis conducted within randomised controlled trials. PharmacoEconomics 2014; 32: 1157–1170.
25.
Johannesson M, Weinstein MC: On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 1993; 12: 459–467.
26.
Claxton K: Exploring uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26: 781–798.
27.
Davis J, Robertson MC, Comans T, Scuffham PA: Guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation of fall prevention strategies. Osteoporos Int 2011; 22: 2449–2459.
28.
Frick KD, Kung JY, Parrish JM, Narrett MJ: Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of fall prevention programs that reduce fall-related hip fractures in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010; 58: 136–141.
29.
Hektoen LF, Aas E, Lurås H: Cost-effectiveness in fall prevention for older women. Scand J Public Health 2009; 37: 584–589.
30.
Health Quality Ontario: The Falls/fractures economic model in ontario residents aged 65 years and over (FEMOR). Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2008; 8: 1–54.
31.
Robertson MC, Devlin N, Gardner MM, Campbell AJ: Effectiveness and economic evaluation of a nurse delivered home exercise programme to prevent falls. 1: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2001; 322: 697–701.
32.
Robertson MC, Devlin N, Scuffham P, Gardner MM, Buchner DM, Campbell AJ: Economic evaluation of a community based -exercise programme to prevent falls. J Epidemiol Community Health 2001; 55: 600–606.
33.
Patil R, Kolu P, Raitanen J, Valvanne J, Kannus P, Karinkanta S, Sievänen H, Uusi-Rasi K: Cost-effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation and exercise in preventing injurious falls among older home-dwelling women: findings from an RCT. Osteoporos Int 2016; 27: 193–201.
34.
Church J, Goodall S, Norman R, Haas M: The cost-effectiveness of falls prevention interventions for older community-dwelling Australians. Aust N Z J Public Health 2012; 36: 241–248.
35.
McLean K, Day L, Dalton A: Economic evaluation of a group-based exercise program for falls prevention among the older community-dwelling population. BMC Geriatr 2015; 15: 33.
36.
Gillespie LD, Robertson MC, Gillespie WJ, Sherrington C, Gates S, Clemson LM, Lamb SE: Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 9: CD007146.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.