Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention for women treated with radiotherapy for gynaecological cancer in a randomized trial

Isabelle Suvaal, Wilbert B. van den Hout, Susanna B. Hummel, Jan Willem M. Mens, Charlotte C. Tuijnman-Raasveld, Laura A. Velema, Henrike Westerveld, Jeltsje S. Cnossen, An Snyers, Ina M. Jürgenliemk-Schulz, Ludy C.H.W. Lutgens, Jannet C. Beukema, Marie A.D. Haverkort, Marlies E. Nowee, Remi A. Nout, Cor D. de Kroon, Helena C. van Doorn, Carien L. Creutzberg, Moniek M. ter Kuile*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention with standard care in women treated with external beam radiotherapy, with or without brachytherapy, for gynaecological cancers. Methods: Eligible women were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 112) or standard care (n = 117). Primary endpoint was sexual functioning at 12-months post-radiotherapy, assessed by the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Nurses documented frequency and duration of intervention sessions, patients reported sexual healthcare and functioning at 1, 3, 6, and 12-months. Costs were related to quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions and visual analogue scale, and to sexual functioning improvement at 12-months. T-tests compared mean QALYs and costs, with multiple imputation for missing data. Results: The nurse-led intervention added €172 per patient, including training costs and 4–5 sessions. Other sexual rehabilitation costs were higher in the standard care group (€107 versus €141, p = 0.02). Total costs were €478 for the intervention group and €357 for standard care (p = 0.03). Valued at €20.000 per QALY, the intervention was 60 %–70 % likely to be cost-effective and less than 50 % likely to be cost-effective in terms of improved sexual functioning. Conclusion: The nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention is not more cost-effective than standard care, however with low costs in both groups. Since costs for standard care were slightly lower, it is preferred from a health-economic perspective. It includes detailed patient education and a dedicated sexual rehabilitation session within the first three months post-radiotherapy, which is better provided at lower cost by a trained nurse.

Original languageEnglish
Article number110683
JournalRadiotherapy and Oncology
Volume203
Early online date14 Dec 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2025

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Gynaecological cancer
  • QALYs
  • Radiotherapy
  • Sexual rehabilitation intervention

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led sexual rehabilitation intervention for women treated with radiotherapy for gynaecological cancer in a randomized trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this