RESUMO
Innovative treatment strategies for decompensated heart failure (HF) are required to achieve cost savings and improvements in outcomes. We developed a decision analytic model from a hospital perspective to compare 2 strategies for the treatment of decompensated HF, ambulatory diuretic infusion therapy, and hospitalization (standard care), with respect to total HF hospitalizations and costs. The ambulatory diuretic therapy strategy included outpatient treatment with high doses of intravenous loop diuretics in a specialized HF unit whereas standard care included hospitalization for intravenous loop diuretic therapy. Model probabilities were derived from the outcomes of patients who were treated for decompensated HF at Brigham and Women's Hospital (Boston, MA). Costs were based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement and the available reports. Based on a sample of patients treated at our institution, the ambulatory diuretic therapy strategy was estimated to achieve a significant reduction in total HF hospitalizations compared with standard care (relative reduction 58.3%). Under the base case assumptions, the total cost of the ambulatory diuretic therapy strategy was $6,078 per decompensation episode per 90 days compared with $12,175 per 90 days with standard care, for a savings of $6,097. The cost savings associated with the ambulatory diuretic strategy were robust against variation up to 50% in costs of ambulatory diuretic therapy and the likelihood of posttreatment hospitalization. An exploratory analysis suggests that ambulatory diuretic therapy is likely to remain cost saving over the long-term. In conclusion, this decision analytic model demonstrates that ambulatory diuretic therapy is likely to be cost saving compared with hospitalization for the treatment of decompensated HF from a hospital perspective. These results suggest that implementation of outpatient HF units that provide ambulatory diuretic therapy to well-selected subgroup of patients may result in significant reductions in health care costs while improving the care of patients across a variety of health care settings.
Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Assistência Ambulatorial/economia , Boston , Árvores de Decisões , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/economia , Hospitalização/economia , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/administração & dosagem , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/economia , Resultado do TratamentoAssuntos
Diuréticos/uso terapêutico , Furosemida/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/uso terapêutico , Sulfonamidas/uso terapêutico , Diuréticos/economia , Furosemida/efeitos adversos , Furosemida/economia , Humanos , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/efeitos adversos , Inibidores de Simportadores de Cloreto de Sódio e Potássio/economia , Sulfonamidas/economia , TorasemidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Inappropriate medication use in patients with heart failure (HF) presents challenges in providing optimal, evidence-based care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incremental differences of concurrent and persistent use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta-blockers, loop diuretics, and digoxin on the one-year, all-cause risk of hospitalization and total healthcare costs associated with treatment of HF in patients enrolled in a managed care organization within the US. METHODS: A retrospective database analysis was conducted spanning from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 1999. Multivariate regression methods were used to examine the association between treatment regimens and hospitalizations or costs after controlling for patient demographics and risk factors. RESULTS: Of the 1903 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 32.3% (n = 615) received none of the 4 HF agents studied and were associated with a 2.5 times greater risk (p < or = 0.001) of hospitalization and 43.6% higher (p < or = 0.001) total costs compared with all other patients with HF. Comparatively, 13.9% (n = 264) utilized the HF medications investigated for at least 6 months. Of those with persistent use of > or =3 agents, approximate decreases in hospitalizations were noted of 80% (p < or = 0.001) and total costs of 70% (p < or = 0.001) relative to patients receiving no HF therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial portion of patients with HF may be receiving suboptimal pharmacotherapeutic care in real-world practice settings, potentially incurring large increases in hospitalizations and total costs. Quality improvement initiatives should seek to identify and manage those not being treated according to guideline recommendations.