One-year budget impact of InTandem™: a novel neurorehabilitation system for individuals with chronic stroke walking impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Chronic stroke walking impairment is associated with high healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) costs. InTandem™ is a neurorehabilitation system that autonomously delivers a rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)-based intervention for the at-home rehabilitation of walking impairment in adults in the chronic phase of stroke recovery. This study was conducted to estimate the budget impact of InTandem in comparison with currently available intervention strategies for improvement of gait/ambulation in individuals with chronic stroke walking impairment. Methods & materials: A budget impact analysis (BIA) for InTandem was conducted based on a 1-million-member US third-party payer perspective over a 1-year time horizon. Key inputs for the budget impact model were: costs for each intervention strategy (InTandem, physical therapy, self-directed walking and no treatment), HCRU costs for persons with chronic stroke and anticipated HCRU cost offsets due to improvements in gait/ambulatory status as measured by self-selected comfortable walking speed (based on functional ability). In addition to the reference case analysis, a sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results: Based on the reference case, introduction of InTandem was projected to result in overall cost savings of $439,954 in one year. Reduction of HCRU costs (-$2,411,778) resulting from improved walking speeds with InTandem offset an increase in intervention costs (+$1,971,824). Demonstrations of cost savings associated with InTandem were robust and were consistently evident in nearly all scenarios evaluated in the sensitivity analysis (e.g., with increased/decreased patient shares, increased HCRU cost or increased InTandem rental duration). Conclusion: The InTandem system is demonstrated to improve walking and ambulation in adults in the chronic phase of stroke recovery after a five-week intervention period. The BIA predicts that introduction of InTandem will be associated with overall cost savings to the payer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".