Predictors of costs from the hospital perspective of primary pulmonary embolism.

The objective of this study was to estimate the total hospital cost per patient admitted through the emergency department with a primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE), and to identify the main components and predictors of costs.Actual costs of care of 652 consecutive patients hospitalised in 10 general hospitals in Belgium, including 31 outlier patients in terms of length of stay (4.8%), were obtained by aggregating all cost components contributing to care of each patient.In both inlier and outlier patients, the mean total cost per patient increased linearly with the degree of severity of illness classes related to the All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group (p<0.0001). Medical procedures, nursing activities and hospitalisation accommodation were the main cost components. We identified six independent predictors of costs in inliers: age group, chronic pulmonary heart disease, heart failure, admission to intensive care unit, initial thrombolysis treatment and type of hospital. There was a statistically significant linear trend between age groups and costs (p<0.0001).An increasing burden of comorbid illness was strongly associated with increasing actual cost for caring hospitalised patients for PE. Increasing age was associated with an increase in all main cost components.

Evaluation of the cost of atrial fibrillation during emergency hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: The number of hospitalizations for atrial fibrillation has increased dramatically. This increase, in the number of hospital stays will continue, given the growth projections based on epidemiological data, and will contribute to significantly increase expenses for the social security system.The objective of this study was to evaluate the length of hospital stay, the average cost borne by social security, and the types of hospital stay expenditures for patients admitted through the emergency department for atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Patients were identified by using the minimal clinical summaries of seven general hospitals in Belgium in 2008. Only hospitalized patients having as primary diagnosis code ICD-9-CM 42731 'atrial fibrillation'were selected for this study. Hospital billing files were analysed in order to isolate the costs borne by social security. Outliers were isolated in order not to have results influenced by patients having an atypical length of stay. RESULTS: Results show that the mean length of stay was 8.6 days and the mean cost charged to social security was euro 3,066.02 per hospital stay.The mean cost of care was strongly associated with the degree of severity index related to the APR-DRG. Approximately 85% of the total cost was related to the cost of hospital days and medical procedures with medical imaging and laboratory tests being the two main cost inductors. 18% of patients had cardioversion during their hospital stay, including 4% who had only that treatment. 19% of patients used amiodarone. Flecainide and propafenone were also used, but less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost of care for AF patients admitted via the emergency department is strongly associated with the degree of severity. Approximately 85% of the total cost is related to the cost of hospital days and medical procedures. Hypertension is the most common secondary diagnosis. An optimal treatment of this risk factor could help to reduce the risk of atrial fibrillation, and thereby reduce the morbidity and costs associated with this disease.

Assessment of pretest probability of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department by physicians in training using the Wells model.

INTRODUCTION: Assessment of pretest probability should be the initial step in investigation of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). In teaching hospitals physicians in training are often the first physicians to evaluate patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of pretest probability assessment of PE by physicians in training using the Wells clinical model and to assess the safety of a diagnostic strategy including pretest probability assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 291 consecutive outpatients with clinical suspicion of PE were categorized as having a low, moderate or high pretest probability of PE by physicians in training who could take supervising physicians' advice when they deemed necessary. Then, patients were managed according to a sequential diagnostic algorithm including D-dimer testing, lung scan, leg compression ultrasonography and helical computed tomography. Patients in whom PE was deemed absent were followed up for 3 months. RESULTS: 34 patients (18%) had PE. Prevalence of PE in the low, moderate and high pretest probability groups categorized by physicians in training alone was 3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1% to 9%), 31% (95% CI: 22% to 42%) and 100% (95% CI: 61% to 100%) respectively. One of the 152 untreated patients (0.7%, 95% CI: 0.1% to 3.6%) developed a thromboembolic event during the 3-month follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Physicians in training can use the Wells clinical model to determine pretest probability of PE. A diagnostic strategy including the use of this model by physicians in training with access to supervising physicians' advice appears to be safe.

Prevention of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Risk assessment and methods of prophylaxis.

PURPOSE: To describe risk assessment models that have been developed to stratify patients into different risk levels of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) and then to review the different methods of prophylaxis and to outline the evidence supporting their effectiveness and safety. SOURCE: Our review of the literature is focused on consensus documents, recent large randomized trials and meta-analyses. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The risk of VTE is determined by the type of surgery and underlying patient factors. Risk assessment models are useful in stratifying patients into different VTE risk levels. However, multiple risk factors are often present in the same patient and in practice the evaluation of their relative contribution to the overall risk remains difficult. A variety of prophylactic strategies including physical and pharmacological methods have been shown to be effective in different patient groups. Patients with a moderate or high risk of VTE should receive prophylaxis consisting of an antithrombotic agent, unless contraindicated, used alone or in combination with a mechanical method. Recommendations concerning which prophylaxis to use and how intensive it should be are based mainly on data from trials using surrogate endpoints, and do not translate easily into practical decisions aiming to reduce the incidence of symptomatic events. CONCLUSION: Although risk assessment models and recommendations provided by consensus documents are of practical assistance, a decision concerning any patient is best made by combining recommendations of the literature with clinical judgment, including individual patient risk factors for thrombosis and bleeding.