Abstract
Objectives 1) To compare the average cost of an emergency department (ED) visit for various minor musculoskeletal disorders between two models of care (physiotherapist and ED physician or ED physician alone); 2) To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these two models of care over a 3-month period post-initial visit; and 3) To estimate the ICER of three ED models of care (physiotherapist and ED physician, ED physician alone, physiotherapist alone) over a two-year period.
Methods A randomized clinical trial was conducted among individuals (n=78) aged 18 to 80 years presenting with a musculoskeletal disorder at a Quebec City (Canada) hospital in 2018-2019. Two models of care were compared: management by a physiotherapist and an ED physician versus usual management by an ED physician. Participants follow-ups were conducted at 1 and 3 months post-initial ED visit. Obj.1: The health care costs incurred by the two groups during their ED visit will be calculated using the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) method and compared using generalized linear models. Obj. 2: The cost-utility analysis over a 3-month time horizon will combine economic and clinical variables (estimated through quality-adjusted life years) using a Societal perspective. The results of the cost-utility analysis will be reported using an ICER. Obj. 3: The ICER will be estimated using a hybrid decision tree (0-3 months post-visit) and Markov model (3-24 months post-visit); the analysis will be conducted from a Societal perspective over a two-year time horizon.
Conclusion This study will help to determine which model of care is most efficient for the management of individuals who come to the ED with minor musculoskeletal disorders. The increased involvement of various health professionals in the management of patients in the ED paves the way for the development of new avenues of practice and more efficient organization of services.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research is a secondary analysis of a project that was funded by the CHU de Quebec - Universite Laval, subsidies from LJH and KP and a research grant awarded by the Fondation du CHU de Quebec for the multidisciplinary council of the CHU de Quebec - Universite Laval. RG received scholarships from the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR), the Fonds de recherche du Quebec - Sante (FRQS), the Unite de Soutien SSA - Quebec, the Ordre professionnel de la physiotherapie du Quebec (OPPQ), the Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en readaptation et integration sociale (Cirris) and Universite Laval. JRG, SB and FD are FRQ-S Research Scholars. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Ethics Committee of the CHU de Quebec - Universite Laval gave ethical approval for this work (#MP-20-2019-4307).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
