Potential impact of a new sepsis prediction model for the primary care setting: early health economic evaluation using an observational cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the potential referral rate and cost impact at different cut-off points of a recently developed sepsis prediction model for general practitioners (GPs). DESIGN: Prospective observational study with decision tree modelling. SETTING: Four out-of-hours GP services in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 357 acutely ill adult patients assessed during home visits. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome is the cost per patient from a healthcare perspective in four scenarios based on different cut-off points for referral of the sepsis prediction model. Second, the number of hospital referrals for the different scenarios is estimated. The potential impact of referral of patients with sepsis on mortality and hospital admission was estimated by an expert panel. Using these study data, a decision tree with a time horizon of 1 month was built to estimate the referral rate and cost impact in case the model would be implemented. RESULTS: Referral rates at a low cut-off (score 2 or 3 on a scale from 0 to 6) of the prediction model were higher than observed for patients with sepsis (99% and 91%, respectively, compared with 88% observed). However, referral was also substantially higher for patients who did not need hospital assessment. As a consequence, cost-savings due to referral of patients with sepsis were offset by increased costs due to unnecessary referral for all cut-offs of the prediction model. CONCLUSIONS: Guidance for referral of adult patients with suspected sepsis in the primary care setting using any cut-off point of the sepsis prediction model is not likely to save costs. The model should only be incorporated in sepsis guidelines for GPs if improvement of care can be demonstrated in an implementation study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 7026).

Advanced image-supported lead placement in cardiac resynchronisation therapy: protocol for the multicentre, randomised controlled ADVISE trial and early economic evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving optimal placement of the left ventricular (LV) lead in cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) is a prerequisite in order to achieve maximum clinical benefit, and is likely to help avoid non-response. Pacing outside scar tissue and targeting late activated segments may improve outcome. The present study will be the first randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy of real-time image-guided LV lead delivery to conventional CRT implantation. In addition, to estimate the cost-effectiveness of targeted lead implantation, an early decision analytic model was developed, and described here. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, interventional, randomised, controlled trial will be conducted in a total of 130 patients with a class I or IIa indication for CRT implantation. Patients will be stratified to ischaemic heart failure aetiology and 1:1 randomised to either empirical lead placement or live image-guided lead placement. Ultimate lead location and echocardiographic assessment will be performed by core laboratories, blinded to treatment allocation and patient information. Late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and CINE-CMR with feature-tracking postprocessing software will be used to semi-automatically determine myocardial scar and late mechanical activation. The subsequent treatment file with optimal LV-lead positions will be fused with the fluoroscopy, resulting in live target-visualisation during the procedure. The primary endpoint is the difference in percentage of successfully targeted LV-lead location. Secondary endpoints are relative percentage reduction in indexed LV end-systolic volume, a hierarchical clinical endpoint, and quality of life. The early analytic model was developed using a Markov-model, consisting of seven mutually exclusive health states. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee Utrecht (NL73416.041.20). All participants are required to provide written informed consent. Results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05053568; Trial NL8666.

Cost of illness of metastatic prostate cancer: a perspective of costs for new treatment options in The Netherlands.

AIM: To assess the resource use and associated costs of treating patients with metastatic prostate cancer with a focus on skeletal-related events (SREs). METHODS: We performed a bottom-up cost of illness study in The Netherlands. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were studied. The mean total costs were €17,931 per patient. SREs that required hospitalization (n = 53) were, at median costs of €2039-9346, depending on care. These SREs had median costs of €200-1912. CONCLUSION: Our data provide a basis to investigate the cost-effectiveness of novel treatment options for metastatic prostate cancer. The impact of SREs on total costs could justify policy aimed at actively preventing SREs, possibly resulting in better quality of life and cost-reduction.