Citation

Davis JC, Marra CA, Robertson MC, Najafzadeh M, Liu‐Ambrose T. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2011; 59(7): 1232-1237.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03474.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

To determine whether the health and cost benefits of resistance training were sustained 12 months after formal cessation of the intervention.

DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial.

SETTING: Community‐dwelling women aged 65 to 75 living in Vancouver, British Columbia.

PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty‐three of the 155 community‐dwelling women aged 65 to 75 years who originally were randomly allocated to once‐weekly resistance training (n=54), twice‐weekly resistance training (n=52), or twice‐weekly balance and tone exercises (control group; n=49) participated in the 12‐month follow‐up study. Of these, 98 took part in the economic evaluation (twice‐weekly balance and tone exercises, n=28; once‐weekly resistance training, n=35; twice‐weekly resistance training, n=35).

MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Healthcare resource utilization was assessed over 21 months (2009 prices); health status was assessed using the EuroQol‐5D to calculate QALYs using a 21‐month time horizon.

RESULTS: Once‐ and twice‐weekly resistance training were less costly than balance and tone classes, with incremental mean healthcare costs of Canadian dollars (CAD$)1,857 and CAD$1,077, respectively. The incremental QALYs for once‐ and twice‐weekly resistance training were −0.051 and −0.081, respectively, compared with balance and tone exercises.

CONCLUSION: The cost benefits of participating in a 12‐month resistance training intervention were sustained for the once‐ and twice‐weekly resistance training group, whereas the health benefits were not.