Innovation in rehabilitation technology: technological opportunities and socioeconomic implications – a theoretical model

Innovation in stroke rehabilitation technology is discussed that, based on published epidemiological and economic data, represents an urgent case to deal with adopting a multidisciplinary perspective. A theoretical model is proposed for the evaluation of socioeconomic implications related to an early diagnosis and early and timely adjustments in the stroke treatment strategy. The model is applied to the case of a new rehabilitation technology: the ALLADIN diagnostic device. The model compares a traditional approach – 'trial and error strategy' – to the innovative one – 'in progress evaluation', considering the diagnostic and rehabilitative steps of the patient's assistive route and assessing social and economic benefits of the innovative device. The new technology allows a precise initial assessment of both the severity of stroke and the level of lost functionality, as long as an evaluation of the expected return from different potential therapies. Moreover, supposing that higher severity of stroke implies higher level of disabilities and social costs, and that the negative impact increases as the level of disability increases, the use of innovative rehabilitation technologies would be more effective in the case of patients with severe and very severe stroke.

[1]  Giuseppe Micieli,et al.  Stroke-unit care for acute stroke patients: an observational follow-up study , 2007, The Lancet.

[2]  B. Norrving,et al.  Costs of Stroke in Sweden A National Perspective , 1994, Stroke.

[3]  A Hofman,et al.  Frequency of stroke in Europe: A collaborative study of population-based cohorts. ILSA Working Group and the Neurologic Diseases in the Elderly Research Group. Italian Longitudinal Study on Aging. , 2000, Neurology.

[4]  B. Fagerberg,et al.  Resource Utilization and Costs of Stroke Unit Care Integrated in a Care Continuum: A 1-Year Controlled, Prospective, Randomized Study in Elderly Patients: The Göteborg 70+ Stroke Study , 2000, Stroke.

[5]  Adrian Bagust,et al.  A model for costs of stroke services. , 2003, Health policy.

[6]  T. Olsen,et al.  Stroke. Neurologic and functional recovery the Copenhagen Stroke Study. , 1999, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[7]  V. Feigin,et al.  Stroke epidemiology: a review of population-based studies of incidence, prevalence, and case-fatality in the late 20th century , 2003, The Lancet Neurology.

[8]  A. Dromerick,et al.  Predictors of acute hospital costs for treatment of ischemic stroke in an academic center. , 1999, Stroke.

[9]  Martin Knapp,et al.  Alternative Strategies for Stroke Care: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility Analyses From a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial , 2003, Stroke.

[10]  T. Ingall.  Stroke--incidence, mortality, morbidity and risk. , 2004, Journal of insurance medicine.

[11]  T. Omae.  Stroke risk factors and stroke prevention. , 1992, Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association.

[12]  P. Amarenco,et al.  Socioeconomic Aspects of Postacute Care for Patients with Brain Infarction in France , 2002, Cerebrovascular Diseases.

[13]  E. Glader,et al.  Cost of stroke in Sweden: an incidence estimate. , 2003, International journal of technology assessment in health care.

[14]  G. Boysen,et al.  COSTS OF HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL SERVICES DURING THE FIRST YEAR AFTER ISCHEMIC STROKE , 1999, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[15]  N. Zethraeus,et al.  Costs of coronary heart disease and stroke: the case of Sweden , 1999, Journal of internal medicine.

[16]  C. Mathers,et al.  Stroke incidence and prevalence in Europe: a review of available data , 2006, European journal of neurology.

[17]  G. Beevers,et al.  Meta-analysis of relation between cigarette smoking and stroke. , 1989, BMJ.

[18]  L. Levin,et al.  Health care and social welfare costs in home-based and hospital-based rehabilitation after stroke. , 2002, Scandinavian journal of caring sciences.

[19]  M. Koopmanschap,et al.  Costs of stroke and stroke services: Determinants of patient costs and a comparison of costs of regular care and care organised in stroke services , 2003, Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E.

[20]  W. Oertel,et al.  Resource utilization and costs of stroke unit care in Germany. , 2004, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[21]  George A. Mensah,et al.  The atlas of heart disease and stroke , 2005 .

[22]  N. Fong,et al.  Total direct cost, length of hospital stay, institutional discharges and their determinants from rehabilitation settings in stroke patients , 2006, Acta neurologica Scandinavica.

[23]  M. Giroud,et al.  Estimating the Cost-Effectiveness of Stroke Units in France Compared With Conventional Care , 2004, Stroke.

[24]  M. Brainin,et al.  Acute neurological stroke care in Europe: results of the European Stroke Care Inventory , 2000, European journal of neurology.

[25]  C. Wolfe,et al.  The development and use of a method to compare the costs of acute stroke across Europe. , 2001, Age and ageing.

[26]  J. Hutton,et al.  A Comparison of the Costs and Survival of Hospital-Admitted Stroke Patients Across Europe , 2001, Stroke.

[27]  M. Munih,et al.  ALLADIN: A Novel Mechatronic Platform Assessing Post-Stroke Functional Recovery , 2005, 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005..

[28]  J. Habbema,et al.  Costs of medical care after first-ever stroke in The Netherlands. , 1995, Stroke.

[29]  H. Diener,et al.  Management Patterns and Health Care Use after Intracerebral Hemorrhage , 2003, Cerebrovascular Diseases.

[30]  V. Hachinski.  Stroke: the next 30 years. , 2002, Stroke.

[31]  Chris Cook,et al.  Economy and Finance , 1988 .