Economic evaluation of a dedicated cardiac resynchronisation therapy preassessment clinic.

INTRODUCTION: Patient evaluation before cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) remains heterogeneous across centres and it is suspected a proportion of patients with unfavourable characteristics proceed to implantation. We developed a unique CRT preassessment clinic (CRT PAC) to act as a final review for patients already considered for CRT. We hypothesised that this clinic would identify some patients unsuitable for CRT through updated investigations and review. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether the CRT PAC led to savings for the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: A decision tree model was made to evaluate two clinical pathways; (1) standard of care where all patients initially seen in an outpatient cardiology clinic proceeded directly to CRT and (2) management of patients in CRT PAC. RESULTS: 244 patients were reviewed in the CRT PAC; 184 patients were eligible to proceed directly for implantation and 48 patients did not meet consensus guidelines for CRT so were not implanted. Following CRT, 82.4% of patients had improvement in their clinical composite score and 57.7% had reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume ≥15%. Using the decision tree model, by reviewing patients in the CRT PAC, the total savings for the NHS was £966 880. Taking into consideration the additional cost of the clinic and by applying this model structure throughout the NHS, the potential savings could be as much as £39 million. CONCLUSIONS: CRT PAC appropriately selects patients and leads to substantial savings for the NHS. Adopting this clinic across the NHS has the potential to save £39 million.

Statistics on the use of cardiac electronic devices and interventional electrophysiological procedures in Africa from 2011 to 2016: report of the Pan African Society of Cardiology (PASCAR) Cardiac Arrhythmias and Pacing Task Forces.

Aims: To provide comprehensive information on the access and use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) and catheter ablation procedures in Africa. Methods and results: The Pan-African Society of Cardiology (PASCAR) collected data on invasive management of cardiac arrhythmias from 2011 to 2016 from 31 African countries. A specific template was completed by physicians, and additional information obtained from industry. Information on health care systems, demographics, economics, procedure rates, and specific training programs was collected. Considerable heterogeneity in the access to arrhythmia care was observed across Africa. Eight of the 31 countries surveyed (26%) did not perform pacemaker implantations. The median pacemaker implantation rate was 2.66 per million population per country (range: 0.14-233 per million population). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy were performed in 12/31 (39%) and 15/31 (48%) countries respectively, mostly by visiting teams. Electrophysiological studies, including complex catheter ablations were performed in all countries from Maghreb, but only one sub-Saharan African country (South Africa). Marked variation in cost (up to 1000-fold) was observed across countries with an inverse correlation between implant rates and the procedure fees standardized to the gross domestic product per capita. Lack of economic resources and facilities, high cost of procedures, deficiency of trained physicians, and non-existent fellowship programs were the main drivers of under-utilization of interventional cardiac arrhythmia care. Conclusion: There is limited access to CIED and ablation procedures in Africa. A quarter of countries did not have pacemaker implantation services, and catheter ablations were only available in one country in sub-Saharan Africa.