COMPARATIVE VALUE-BASED PERFORMANCE ACROSS NUTRITION, PSYCHOLOGY, AND PHYSIOTHERAPY CARE PATHWAYS USING PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES, EXPERIENCE, AND COST DATA

Author(s)

Lívia Loamí Paula, MSc, PhD1, Arthur Lorran Melo André da Silva, BSc2, Fernanda Franco Munari, MSc1, Talita Garcia do Nascimento Castro, PhD1, Lidiane de Olivera Rodrigues, BSc2, Moacyr Campos, MD1, Bruna Andrade Guedes, BSc1, Jean Michel Correia Brault, BSc2, Fernanda Vitoria Cruz Oliveira Taveira, BSc1, Mateus Frederico de Paula, MSc1, Taissa Targino Cruz, BSc3, Rebecca Rosal Pacheco Rosa, MSc3, Bruno Tirotti Saragiotto, PhD1, Giulia Xavier de Carvalho, MSc3, Felipe Ribeiro Cabral Fagundes, PhD1.
1Hi! Healthcare Intelligence, São José dos Campos, Brazil, 2SEST SENAT – Social Promotion Management, Brasilia, Brazil, 3SEST SENAT – Social Promotion Management, Brasília, Brazil.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the value delivered by three multidisciplinary care pathways (Nutrition, Psychology, and Physiotherapy) by integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and direct care costs.
METHODS: A retrospective real-world analysis was conducted using routinely collected data from May to July 2025 across multiple units. PROMs, PREMs, and cost data were analyzed. Effectiveness scores were derived from aggregated outcome and experience measures. Mean effectiveness, mean cost per patient, and cost per unit of effectiveness were calculated for each pathway. The samples included 358 patients in Nutrition, 233 in Psychology, and 453 in Physiotherapy.
RESULTS: The Nutrition pathway showed a mean effectiveness score of 87.65, with a mean cost per patient of R$ 214.34, resulting in a cost of R$ 2.45 per unit of effectiveness. The Psychology pathway achieved a mean effectiveness of 83.00, with a mean cost per patient of R$ 638.57 and a cost of R$ 7.69 per unit of effectiveness. The Physiotherapy pathway presented a mean effectiveness of 83.56, with a mean cost per patient of R$ 350.61 and a cost of R$ 4.20 per unit of effectiveness. All three pathways demonstrated high patient-reported outcomes and experience, with high satisfaction and Net Promoter Scores. Most patients were positioned in the high-value quadrants of the value matrix, although relevant differences in cost-efficiency were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: All three care pathways delivered high value from the patient perspective. However, important differences in cost-efficiency were identified. Nutrition achieved the highest value at the lowest cost, while Psychology delivered similar perceived benefits at a higher cost. Integrating PROMs, PREMs, and cost data is a feasible and scalable strategy to support value-based healthcare management and resource allocation.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6

Code

HSD25

Topic

Health Service Delivery & Process of Care

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×