Value of Nonpharmacological Interventions for People With an Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

Value Health. 2022 Oct;25(10):1778-1790. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.014. Epub 2022 May 5.


OBJECTIVES: Acquired brain injury (ABI) has long-lasting effects, and patients and their families require continued care and support, often for the rest of their lives. For many individuals living with an ABI disorder, nonpharmacological rehabilitation treatment care has become increasingly important care component and relevant for informed healthcare decision making. Our study aimed to appraise economic evidence on the cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for individuals living with an ABI.

METHODS: This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020187469), and a protocol article was subject to peer review. Searches were conducted across several databases for articles published from inception to 2021. Study quality was assessed according the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist and Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes criteria.

RESULTS: Of the 3772 articles reviewed 41 publications met the inclusion criteria. There was a considerable heterogeneity in methodological approaches, target populations, study time frames, and perspectives and comparators used. Keeping these issues in mind, we find that 4 multidisciplinary interventions studies concluded that fast-track specialized services were cheaper and more cost-effective than usual care, with cost savings ranging from £253 to £6063. In 3 neuropsychological studies, findings suggested that meditated therapy was more effective and saved money than usual care. In 4 early supported discharge studies, interventions were dominant over usual care, with cost savings ranging from £142 to £1760.

CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness evidence of different nonpharmacological rehabilitation treatments is scant. More robust evidence is needed to determine the value of these and other interventions across the ABI care pathway.

PMID:35525832 | DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.014


Eileen Mitchell
Elayne Ahern
Sanjib Saha
Grainne McGettrick
Dominic Trépel