ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Globally the burden of heart failure is rising. Hospitalisation is one of the main contributors to the burden of heart failure and unfortunately, the majority of heart failure patients will experience multiple hospitalisations over their lifetime. Considering the high health care cost associated with heart failure, a review of economic evaluations of post-discharge heart failure services is warranted. AIM: An integrated review of the economic evaluations of post-discharge nurse-led heart failure services for patients hospitalised with acute heart failure. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched using EBSCOHost: CINAHL complete, Medline complete, Embase, Scopus, EconLit, Global Health, and Health source (Consumer and Nursing/Academic) for published articles until 22nd June 2021. The searches focussed on papers that examined the cost-effectiveness of nurse-led clinics or telemonitoring involving nurses to follow-up patients after hospitalisation for acute heart failure. GRADE criteria and CHEERS checklist were used to determine the quality of the evidence and the quality of reporting of the economic evaluation. RESULTS: Out of 453 studies identified, eight studies were included: four in heart failure clinics and four in telemonitoring programs. Five of the articles were cost-effectiveness analyses, one a cost comparison and two studies involved economic modelling The GRADE criteria were rated as high in five studies. In which, four studies examined the cost-effectiveness of telemonitoring programs. Based on the CHEERS checklist for reporting quality of economic evaluations, the majority of economic evaluations were rated between 86 and 96%. All the studies found the intervention to be cost-effective compared to usual care with Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios ranging from $18 259 (Canadian dollars)/life year gained to 40,321 per Quality Adjusted Life Years gained. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led heart failure clinics and telemonitoring programs were found to be cost-effective. Certainly, this review has shown that heart failure clinics and telemonitoring programs do represent value for money with their greatest impact and cost savings through reducing rehospitalisations.
Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care , Cardiology Service, Hospital , Heart Failure/nursing , Nurse's Role , Nursing Staff, Hospital , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Ambulatory Care/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Cost Savings , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/mortality , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Hospital Costs , Humans , Leadership , Nursing Staff, Hospital/economics , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/economics , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
We performed a retrospective study of cardiology telemedicine visits at a large academic pediatric center between 2016 and 2019 (pre COVID-19). Telemedicine patient visits were matched to data from their previous in-person visits, to evaluate any significant differences in total charge, insurance compensation, patient payment, percent reimbursement and zero reimbursement. Miles were measured between patient's home and the address of previous visit. We found statistically significant differences in mean charges of telemedicine versus in-person visits (2019US$) (172.95 vs 218.27, p=0.0046), patient payment for telemedicine visits versus in-person visits (2019US$) (11.13 vs 62.83, p≤0.001), insurance reimbursement (2019US$) (65.18 vs 110.85, p≤0.001) and insurance reimbursement rate (43% vs 61%, p=0.0029). Rate of zero reimbursement was not different. Mean distance from cardiology clinic was 35 miles. No adverse outcomes were detected. This small retrospective study showed cost reduction and a decrease in travel time for families participating in telemedicine visits. Future work is needed to enhance compensation for telemedicine visits.
Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care , Cardiology Service, Hospital , Cardiovascular Diseases , Costs and Cost Analysis , Telemedicine , Ambulatory Care/economics , Ambulatory Care/methods , Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Cardiovascular Diseases/economics , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Child , Cost Savings/methods , Costs and Cost Analysis/methods , Costs and Cost Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Family Health , Female , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Heart Defects, Congenital/economics , Heart Defects, Congenital/epidemiology , Heart Defects, Congenital/therapy , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/economics , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: As a result of advances in pediatric care and diagnostic testing, there is a growing population of adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). The purpose of this study was to better define the epidemiology and changes in the trend of hospitalizations for ACHD in Korean society. METHODS: We reviewed outpatient and inpatient data from 2005 to 2017 to identify patient ≥18 years of age admitted for acute care with a congenital heart disease (CHD) diagnosis in the pediatric cardiology division. We tried to analyze changes of hospitalization trend for ACHD. RESULTS: The ratio of outpatients with ACHD increased 286.5%, from 11.1% (1748/15,682) in 2005 to 31.8% (7795/24,532) in 2017. The number of ACHD hospitalizations increased 360.7%, from 8.9% (37/414) in 2005 to 32.1% (226/705) in 2017. The average patient age increased from 24.3 years in 2005 to 27.4 in 2017. The main diagnosis for admission of ACHD is heart failure, arrhythmia and Fontan-related complications. The annual ICU admission percentage was around 5% and mean length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 8.4 ± 14.6 days. Mean personal hospital charges by admission of ACHD increased to around two times from 2005 to 2017. (from $2578.1 to $3697.0). Total annual hospital charges by ACHD markedly increased ten times (from $95,389.7 to $831,834.2). CONCLUSIONS: The number of hospital cares for ACHD dramatically increased more than five times from 2005 to 2017. We need preparations for efficient healthcare for adults with CHD such as a multi-dimensional approach, effective communication, and professional training.
Subject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Heart Defects, Congenital/epidemiology , Heart Defects, Congenital/therapy , Hospitalization/trends , Pediatrics/trends , Survivors , Adolescent , Adult , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Female , Health Expenditures/trends , Heart Defects, Congenital/diagnosis , Heart Defects, Congenital/economics , Hospital Charges/trends , Hospital Costs/trends , Hospitalization/economics , Humans , Male , Pediatrics/economics , Retrospective Studies , Seoul/epidemiology , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have shown favorable clinical outcomes for coronary CT angiography (CTA) in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Our goal was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of coronary CTA as compared to alternative management strategies for ACP patients over lifetime. METHODS: Markov microsimulation model was developed to compare cost-effectiveness of competitive strategies for ACP patients: 1) coronary CTA, 2) standard of care (SOC), 3) AHA/ACC Guidelines, and 4) expedited emergency department (ED) discharge protocol with outpatient testing. ROMICAT-II trial was used to populate the model with low to intermediate risk of ACS patient data, whereas diagnostic test-, treatment effect-, morbidity/mortality-, quality of life- and cost data were obtained from the literature. We predicted test utilization, costs, 1-, 3-, 10-year and over lifetime cardiovascular morbidity/mortality for each strategy. We determined quality adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Observed outcomes in ROMICAT-II were used to validate the short-term model. RESULTS: Estimated short-term outcomes accurately reflected observed outcomes in ROMICAT-II as coronary CTA was associated with higher costs ($4,490 vs. $2,513-$4,144) and revascularization rates (5.2% vs. 2.6%-3.7%) compared to alternative strategies. Over lifetime, coronary CTA dominated SOC and ACC/AHA Guidelines and was cost-effective compared to expedited ED protocol ($49,428/QALY). This was driven by lower cardiovascular mortality (coronary CTA vs. expedited discharge: 3-year: 1.04% vs. 1.10-1.17; 10-year: 5.06% vs. 5.21-5.36%; respectively). CONCLUSION: Coronary CTA in patients with suspected ACS renders affordable long-term health benefits as compared to alternative strategies.
Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Acute Coronary Syndrome/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Computed Tomography Angiography/economics , Coronary Angiography/economics , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Health Care Costs , Acute Coronary Syndrome/mortality , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Cost Savings , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Support Techniques , Female , Humans , Male , Markov Chains , Middle Aged , Models, Economic , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Quality of Life , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Risk Factors , Time FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine the feasibility, safety, clinical outcomes, and costs associated with computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) in acute chest pain (ACP) patients in a coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA)-based triage program. BACKGROUND: FFRCT is useful in determining lesion-specific ischemia in patients with stable ischemic heart disease, but its utility in ACP has not been studied. METHODS: ACP patients with no known coronary artery disease undergoing coronary CTA and coronary CTA with FFRCT were studied. FFRCT ≤0.80 was considered positive for hemodynamically significant stenosis. RESULTS: Among 555 patients, 297 underwent coronary CTA and FFRCT (196 negative, 101 positive), whereas 258 had coronary CTA only. The rejection rate for FFRCT was 1.6%. At 90 days, there was no difference in major adverse cardiac events (including death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unexpected revascularization after the index visit) between the coronary CTA and FFRCT groups (4.3% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.310). Diagnostic failure, defined as discordance between the coronary CTA or FFRCT results with invasive findings, did not differ between the groups (1.9% vs. 1.68%; p = NS). No deaths or myocardial infarction occurred with negative FFRCT when revascularization was deferred. Negative FFRCT was associated with higher nonobstructive disease on invasive coronary angiography (56.5%) than positive FFRCT (8.0%) and coronary CTA (22.9%) (p < 0.001). There was no difference in overall costs between the coronary CTA and FFRCT groups ($8,582 vs. $8,048; p = 0.550). CONCLUSIONS: In ACP, FFRCT is feasible, with no difference in major adverse cardiac events and costs compared with coronary CTA alone. Deferral of revascularization is safe with negative FFRCT, which is associated with higher nonobstructive disease on invasive angiography.
Subject(s)
Angina Pectoris/diagnostic imaging , Cardiology Service, Hospital , Computed Tomography Angiography , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Emergency Service, Hospital , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Aged , Angina Pectoris/economics , Angina Pectoris/physiopathology , Angina Pectoris/therapy , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Computed Tomography Angiography/economics , Coronary Angiography/economics , Coronary Artery Disease/economics , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Coronary Stenosis/economics , Coronary Stenosis/physiopathology , Coronary Stenosis/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Feasibility Studies , Female , Hospital Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Registries , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , TriageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Quality improvement initiatives have been developed to improve acute coronary syndrome care largely in high-income country settings. We sought to synthesize the effect size and quality of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies for hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions on clinical outcomes and process of care measures for their potential implementation in low- and middle-income country settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a bibliometric search of databases and trial registers and a hand search in 2016 and performed an updated search in May 2018 and May 2019. We performed data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality of evidence assessments in duplicate. We assessed differences in outcomes by study design comparing RCTs to nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies and by country income status. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to substantial, unexplained heterogeneity among the included studies, and thus, we present a qualitative synthesis. We screened 5858 records and included 32 studies (14 RCTs [n=109 763] and 18 nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies [n=54-423]). In-hospital mortality ranged from 2.1% to 4.8% in the intervention groups versus 3.3% to 5.1% in the control groups in 5 RCTs (n=55 942). Five RCTs (n=64 313) reported 3.0% to 31.0% higher rates of reperfusion for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the intervention groups. The effect sizes for in-hospital and discharge medical therapies in a majority of RCTs were 3.0% to 10.0% higher in the intervention groups. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality evaluated by 4 RCTs (n=42 384), which reported 2.5% to 15.0% versus 5.9% to 22% 30-day mortality rates in the intervention versus control groups. In contrast, nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies reported larger effect sizes compared to RCTs. There were no significant consistent differences in outcomes between high-income and middle-income countries. Low-income countries were not represented in any of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions have a modest effect on process of care measures but not on clinical outcomes with expected differences by study design. Although quality improvement programs have an ongoing and important role for acute coronary syndrome quality of care in high-income country settings, further research will help to identify key components for contextualizing and implementing such interventions to new settings to achieve their desired effects. Systematic Review Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Unique identifier: CRD42016047604.
Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Cardiology Service, Hospital/standards , Developing Countries , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/standards , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/etiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/mortality , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Evidence-Based Medicine , Health Care Costs/standards , Humans , Income , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/economics , Quality Improvement/economics , Quality Indicators, Health Care/economics , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Chest pain continues to be a major burden on the healthcare system with more than eight million patients being evaluated in the emergency department (ED) setting annually at a cost of greater than 10 billion dollars. Missed chest pain diagnoses for ischemia are the leading cause of malpractice lawsuits for ED physicians. The use of cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to assess acute chest pain was adopted at the Chickasaw Nation Medical Center to attempt to accurately diagnose low to intermediate risk chest pain and potentially reduce the cost of chest pain evaluation to the system while still transferring appropriate high-risk patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients presenting to the ED with low to moderate risk chest pain were evaluated with at least two negative troponin levels, an ECG, and in most instances overnight observation followed by CCTA in the morning if eligible. High-risk patients were transported to a tertiary care facility with cardiac catheterization capabilities. Medical records were checked to determine if any adverse events had occurred during follow-up. Adverse events were defined as myocardial infarction, death, and/or revascularization. Mean follow-up was 28 months. RESULTS: Of the 368 patients studied, 29 patients were transferred due to findings of at least moderate obstructive disease. Of those 29 patients transferred, 11 patients underwent revascularization (10 underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and one underwent coronary artery bypass grafting). The average coronary artery calcium score for patients transferred was 96.1. The average coronary artery calcium score for patients undergoing revascularization was 174.6. Six patients had normal coronary arteries on catheterization. The remaining 12 patients had the moderate obstructive disease by catheterization that was not physiologically significant by either invasive fractional flow reserve or in two instances, negative stress perfusion testing. At 24 months, two patients had undergone revascularization and one patient had died suddenly. CONCLUSION: The cost savings associated with a CCTA first strategy to evaluate chest pain were ~$1 200 244.10. For a self-insured health system such as the Chickasaw Nation, these are very important cost savings.
Subject(s)
Angina Pectoris/diagnostic imaging , Angina Pectoris/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Computed Tomography Angiography/economics , Coronary Angiography/economics , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/economics , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Hospital Costs , Multidetector Computed Tomography/economics , Rural Health Services/economics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Angina Pectoris/ethnology , Coronary Artery Disease/ethnology , Cost Savings , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Indians, North American , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , United States Indian Health Service/economicsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many Western countries face the challenge of providing high-quality care while keeping the healthcare system accessible and affordable. In an attempt to deal with this challenge a new healthcare delivery model called primary care plus (PC+) was introduced in the Netherlands. Within the PC+ model, medical specialists perform consultations in a primary care setting. PC+ aims to support the general practitioners in gatekeeping and prevent unnecessary referrals to hospital care. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of a cardiology PC+ intervention on the Triple Aim outcomes, which were operationalized by patient-perceived quality of care, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes, and healthcare costs per patient. METHODS: This is a quantitative study with a longitudinal observational design. The study population consisted of patients, with non-acute and low-complexity cardiology-related health complaints, who were referred to the PC+ centre (intervention group) or hospital-based outpatient care (control group; care-as-usual). Patient-perceived quality of care and HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L, EQ-VAS and SF-12) were measured through questionnaires at three different time points. Healthcare costs per patient were obtained from administrative healthcare data and patients were followed for nine months. Chi-square tests, independent t-tests and multilevel linear models were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The patient-perceived quality of care was significantly higher within the intervention group for 26 out of 27 items. HRQoL outcomes did significantly increase in both groups (P <0.05) but there was no significant interaction between group and time. At baseline and also at three, six and nine months' follow-up the healthcare costs per patient were significantly lower for patients in the intervention group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While this study showed no improvements on HRQoL outcomes, PC+ seemed to be promising as it results in improved quality of care as experienced by patients and lower healthcare costs per patient.
Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/standards , Cardiology Service, Hospital/standards , Cardiology/trends , Heart Diseases/therapy , Adult , Ambulatory Care/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Female , Health Care Costs , Heart Diseases/economics , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Outpatients , Primary Health Care , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Background Cardiac catheterization is an important but costly component of health care for young patients with cardiac disease. Measurement of variation in their cost between hospitals and identification of the reasons for this variation may help reduce cost without compromising quality. Methods and Results Using data from Pediatric Health Information Systems Database from January 2007 to December 2015, the costs of 9 procedures were measured. Mixed-effects multivariable models were used to generate case-mix-adjusted estimates of each hospital's cost for each procedure and measure interhospital variation. Procedures (n=35 637) from 43 hospitals were studied. Median costs varied from $8249 (diagnostic catheterization after orthotopic heart transplantation) to $38 909 (transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement). There was marked variation in the cost of procedures between hospitals with 3.5- to 8.9-fold differences in the case-mix-adjusted cost between the most and least expensive hospitals. No significant correlation was found between hospitals' procedure-specific mortality rates and costs. Higher procedure volume was not associated with lower cost except for diagnostic procedures in heart transplant patients and pulmonary artery angioplasty. At the hospital level, the proportion of cases that were outliers (>95th percentile) was significantly associated with rank in terms of cost (Spearman's ρ ranging from 0.37 to 0.89, P<0.01). Conclusions Large-magnitude hospital variation in cost was not explained by case-mix or volume. Further research is necessary to determine the degree to which variation in cost is the result of differences in the efficiency of the delivery of healthcare services and the rate of catastrophic adverse outcomes and resultant protracted and expensive hospitalizations.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Catheterization/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Healthcare Disparities/economics , Heart Defects, Congenital/economics , Hospital Costs , Pediatrics/economics , Adolescent , Cardiac Catheterization/trends , Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Child , Child, Preschool , Databases, Factual , Female , Health Services Research , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Heart Defects, Congenital/diagnosis , Heart Defects, Congenital/therapy , Hospital Costs/trends , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Pediatrics/trends , Retrospective Studies , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The recent introduction of an entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibril-lator (S-ICD) represents an important progress in the defibrillation technology towards a less invasive approach. This is a single-center observational study of S-ICD implantations in Poland. METHODS: The S-ICD was implanted in 11 patients with standard indications for an ICD. Patients in whom the device was implanted were evaluated for adverse events and device function at hospital discharge. All hospitalization costs were calculated and summed up for all patients. Costs were divided into following categories: medical materials, pharmaceuticals, operating theatre staff, cardiology depart-ment staff, laboratory tests, non-laboratory tests and additional non-medical costs. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 51.6 ± 16.4 years, 9 were men and 2 were women. Four pa-tients had atrial fibrillation as the basal rhythm, 1 patient had atrial flutter and 6 patients had sinus rhythm. All patients had at least one condition that precluded the use of a traditional ICD system or the S-ICD was preferred due to other conditions, i.e. a history complicated transvenous ICD therapy (18%), anticipated higher risk of infection (27%), lack or difficult vascular access (18%), young age and anticipated high cumulated risk of lifetime device therapy (36%). The mean duration of the im-plantation procedure was 2 h. One patient developed a postoperative pocket hematoma. Mean total time of hospitalization was 28 (6-92) days. Average cost of hospitalization per patient was 21,014.29 EUR (minimal = 19,332.71 EUR and maximal = 24,824.14 EUR). CONCLUSIONS: S-ICD implantation appears to provide a viable alternative to transvenous ICD, espe-cially for patients without pacing requirements.
Subject(s)
Death, Sudden, Cardiac/prevention & control , Defibrillators, Implantable/economics , Electric Countershock/economics , Hospital Costs , Hospitalization/economics , Adult , Aged , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/economics , Drug Costs , Electric Countershock/adverse effects , Electric Countershock/instrumentation , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/economics , Male , Middle Aged , Operative Time , Personnel, Hospital/economics , Poland , Postoperative Complications/economics , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Primary Prevention/economics , Risk Factors , Salaries and Fringe Benefits/economics , Secondary Prevention , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To assess the current landscape of the heart failure (HF) epidemic and provide targets for future health policy interventions in Medicare, a contemporary appraisal of its epidemiology across inpatient and outpatient care settings is needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a national 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries from 2002 to 2013, we identified a cohort of 2 331 939 unique fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ≥65-years-old followed for all inpatient and outpatient encounters over a 10-year period (2004-2013). Preexisting HF was defined by any HF encounter during the first year, and incident HF with either 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient HF encounters. Mean age of the cohort was 72 years; 57% were women, and 86% and 8% were white and black, respectively. Within this cohort, 518 223 patients had preexisting HF, and 349 826 had a new diagnosis of HF during the study period. During 2004 to 2013, the rates of incident HF declined 32%, from 38.7 per 1000 (2004) to 26.2 per 1000 beneficiaries (2013). In contrast, prevalent (preexisting + incident) HF increased during our study period from 162 per 1000 (2004) to 172 per 1000 beneficiaries (2013) (Ptrend <0.001 for both). Finally, the overall 1-year mortality among patients with incident HF is high (24.7%) with a 0.4% absolute decline annually during the study period, with a more pronounced decrease among those diagnosed in an inpatient versus outpatient setting (Pinteraction <0.001) CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, there have been substantial changes in the epidemiology of HF in Medicare beneficiaries, with a decline in incident HF and a decrease in 1-year HF mortality, whereas the overall burden of HF continues to increase.
Subject(s)
Fee-for-Service Plans/economics , Heart Failure/economics , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Insurance Benefits/economics , Medicare/economics , Administrative Claims, Healthcare , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ambulatory Care/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Databases, Factual , Female , Health Services Needs and Demand , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/mortality , Humans , Incidence , Male , Needs Assessment , Prevalence , Prognosis , Time Factors , United StatesABSTRACT
AIMS: To determine the usability, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness of two handheld single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) devices for atrial fibrillation (AF) screening in a hospital population with an increased risk for AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hospitalized patients (n = 445) at cardiological or geriatric wards were screened for AF by two handheld ECG devices (MyDiagnostick and AliveCor). The performance of the automated algorithm of each device was evaluated against a full 12-lead or 6-lead ECG recording. All ECGs and monitor tracings were also independently reviewed in a blinded fashion by two electrophysiologists. Time investments by nurses and physicians were tracked and used to estimate cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies. Handheld recordings were not possible in 7 and 21.4% of cardiology and geriatric patients, respectively, because they were not able to hold the devices properly. Even after the exclusion of patients with an implanted device, sensitivity and specificity of the automated algorithms were suboptimal (Cardiology: 81.8 and 94.2%, respectively, for MyDiagnostick; 54.5 and 97.5%, respectively, for AliveCor; Geriatrics: 89.5 and 95.7%, respectively, for MyDiagnostick; 78.9 and 97.9%, respectively, for AliveCor). A scenario based on automated AliveCor evaluation in patients without AF history and without an implanted device proved to be the most cost-effective method, with a provider cost to identify one new AF patient of 193 and 82 at cardiology and geriatrics, respectively. The cost to detect one preventable stroke per year would be 7535 and 1916, respectively (based on average CHA2DS2-VASc of 3.9 ± 2.0 and 5.0 ± 1.5, respectively). Manual interpretation increases sensitivity, but decreases specificity, doubling the cost per detected patient, but remains cheaper than sole 12-lead ECG screening. CONCLUSION: Using AliveCor or MyDiagnostick handheld recorders requires a structured screening strategy to be effective and cost-effective in a hospital setting. It must exclude patients with implanted devices and known AF, and requires targeted additional 12-lead ECGs to optimize specificity. Under these circumstances, the expenses per diagnosed new AF patient and preventable stroke are reasonable.
Subject(s)
Action Potentials , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Cardiology Service, Hospital , Cell Phone , Electrocardiography/instrumentation , Geriatrics , Heart Conduction System/physiopathology , Hospitalization , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Algorithms , Atrial Fibrillation/economics , Atrial Fibrillation/physiopathology , Belgium , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Cell Phone/economics , Computer Simulation , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Electrocardiography/economics , Equipment Design , Female , Geriatrics/economics , Heart Rate , Hospital Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mobile Applications , Models, Economic , Predictive Value of Tests , Reproducibility of Results , Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted , Tertiary Care CentersABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography angiography (coronary CTA) has emerged as a non-invasive method of diagnosing coronary artery disease. The extent of utilization and uptake of this technology since initiation of its funding by the government of Ontario is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to examine coronary CTA utilization and the rates of elective invasive coronary angiography and revascularization before and after funding initiation. METHODS: We studied all coronary CTAs performed on adults in Ontario after initiation of funding. We also used an interrupted time series analysis to compare the average monthly rates of invasive angiography and revascularization before and after initiation of funding. RESULTS: There was an initial steep increase in age-and sex-standardized rates of coronary CTA from 5.0 to 11.4/100,000 over the first two quarters after funding initiation. Afterwards, there was a gradual increase in utilization from 11.4 to 17.1/100,000 over two subsequent calendar years. There was a significant reduction in both the mean monthly outpatient invasive coronary angiography (from 20.7 to 19.9 per 100,000 (p = 0.0004)) and revascularization (from 4.9 to 4.4 per 100,000 (p < 0.0001)) rates in the three years following introduction of the coronary CTA billing code as compared to the three prior to its introduction. CONCLUSIONS: Since the introduction of coronary CTA funding in Ontario, there has been a steady and controlled increase in its utilization. The increasing use of coronary CTA was associated with a reduction in both the rates of invasive angiography and revascularization.
Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Cardiology Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Ambulatory Care/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Coronary Angiography/economics , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/economics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Databases, Factual , Female , Hospital Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario , Predictive Value of Tests , Time Factors , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/economicsSubject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Cardiology/economics , Diagnostic Techniques, Cardiovascular/economics , Medicare/economics , Office Visits/economics , Aged , Cardiology/statistics & numerical data , Cardiology Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Fees and Charges/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We explore whether cardiologist service volume, hospital level and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are associated with medical costs and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) mortality. METHODS: From the 1997-2010 Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database of the National Health Research Institute, we identified AMI patients and performed multiple regression analyses to explore the relationships among the different hospital levels and treatment factors. RESULTS: We identified 2942 patients with AMI in medical centers and 4325 patients with AMI in regional hospitals. Cardiologist service volume, performing PCI and medical costs per patient were higher in medical centers than in regional hospitals (P < 0.0001). However, the two hospital levels did not differ significantly in in-hospital mortality (P = 0.1557). Post hoc analysis showed significant differences in in-hospital mortality rate and in medical costs among the eight groups subdivided on the basis of hospital level, cardiologist service volume, and whether PCI was performed (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of encouraging hospitals to develop PCI capability and increase their cardiologist service volume after taking medical costs into account. Transferring AMI patients to hospitals with higher cardiologist service volume and PCI performed can also be very important.
Subject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/economics , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Comorbidity , Databases, Factual , Female , Health Services Research/methods , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, Community/economics , Hospitals, Community/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Urban/economics , Hospitals, Urban/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/economics , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/economics , Taiwan/epidemiology , Workload/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Use of pretest probability can reduce unnecessary testing. We hypothesize that quantitative pretest probability, linked to evidence-based management strategies, can reduce unnecessary radiation exposure and cost in low-risk patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome and pulmonary embolism. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, 4-center, randomized controlled trial of decision support effectiveness. Subjects were adults with chest pain and dyspnea, nondiagnostic ECGs, and no obvious diagnosis. The clinician provided data needed to compute pretest probabilities from a Web-based system. Clinicians randomized to the intervention group received the pretest probability estimates for both acute coronary syndrome and pulmonary embolism and suggested clinical actions designed to lower radiation exposure and cost. The control group received nothing. Patients were followed for 90 days. The primary outcome and sample size of 550 was predicated on a significant reduction in the proportion of healthy patients exposed to >5 mSv chest radiation. A total of 550 patients were randomized, and 541 had complete data. The proportion with >5 mSv to the chest and no significant cardiopulmonary diagnosis within 90 days was reduced from 33% to 25% (P=0.038). The intervention group had significantly lower median chest radiation exposure (0.06 versus 0.34 mSv; P=0.037, Mann-Whitney U test) and lower median costs ($934 versus $1275; P=0.018) for medical care. Adverse events occurred in 16% of controls and 11% in the intervention group (P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Provision of pretest probability and prescriptive advice reduced radiation exposure and cost of care in low-risk ambulatory patients with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome and pulmonary embolism. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01059500.
Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Angina Pectoris/diagnostic imaging , Cardiology Service, Hospital , Coronary Angiography , Decision Support Techniques , Dyspnea/diagnostic imaging , Emergency Service, Hospital , Patient Selection , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnostic imaging , Radiation Dosage , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Unnecessary Procedures , Acute Coronary Syndrome/complications , Acute Coronary Syndrome/economics , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Angina Pectoris/economics , Angina Pectoris/etiology , Angina Pectoris/therapy , Bayes Theorem , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Coronary Angiography/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted , Diagnosis, Differential , Dyspnea/economics , Dyspnea/etiology , Dyspnea/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Female , Hospital Costs , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Probability , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Pulmonary Embolism/complications , Pulmonary Embolism/economics , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Time Factors , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/economics , United States , Unnecessary Procedures/economicsABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous cardiac assist device (pVAD) therapy in the emergent setting compared with traditional surgical hemodynamic support alternatives. BACKGROUND: Previous research has demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of pVAD hemodynamic support for patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. For patients in cardiogenic shock (CS), use of pVAD therapy has been shown to reduce length of stay (LOS). METHODS: National utilization and outcome data from the 2010-2011 MedPAR and state-sponsored all-payer databases were collected for patients with an acute myocardial infarction complicated by CS who were treated with either a pVAD (n = 883) or with traditional surgical hemodynamic support alternatives (ECMO and extracorporeal VAD) (n = 305). RESULTS: Discharge survival was greater with pVADs than with surgical alternatives (56% vs. 42%, P < 0.001) and was achieved with a strong trend toward reduced LOS (13.2 and 17.9 days, respectively, P = 0.055) and a significantly lower cost of the index admission ($90,929 and $144,257, respectively, P < 0.001). Cost-effectiveness analysis based on the national data demonstrated that pVAD achieved improved outcomes at lower cost. Data were also collected for similar patients who underwent protocol-guided pVAD therapy (using Impella 2.5) at PinnacleHealth, between 2009 and 2011 (n = 30). At this site, the survival rate increased to 60%, length of hospitalization was shortened to 6 days, and admission costs were lowered to $53,850 relative to the surgical alternatives strategy. CONCLUSIONS: For patients in CS requiring emergent hemodynamic support, pVAD therapy offers a less invasive alternative that can be deployed sooner, resulting in better outcomes, shorter LOS, lower costs and with no incremental cost, and a survival benefit when compared with traditional surgical hemodynamic support alternatives. PVAD therapy (and Impella 2.5 in particular) is emerging as a dominant strategy for this challenging patient population.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Catheterization/economics , Cardiology Service, Hospital/economics , Emergency Service, Hospital/economics , Heart-Assist Devices/economics , Hemodynamics , Myocardial Infarction/economics , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Shock, Cardiogenic/economics , Shock, Cardiogenic/therapy , Cardiac Catheterization/adverse effects , Cardiac Catheterization/instrumentation , Cardiac Catheterization/mortality , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Hospital Costs , Humans , Length of Stay/economics , Models, Economic , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/physiopathology , Patient Discharge/economics , Pennsylvania , Prosthesis Design , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Prosthesis Implantation/mortality , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Retrospective Studies , Shock, Cardiogenic/diagnosis , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/mortality , Shock, Cardiogenic/physiopathology , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (cCTA) allows rapid, noninvasive exclusion of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). However, concern exists whether implementation of cCTA in the assessment of patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain will lead to increased downstream testing and costs compared with alternative strategies. Our aim was to compare observed actual costs of usual care (UC) with projected costs of a strategy including early cCTA in the evaluation of patients with acute chest pain in the Rule Out Myocardial Infarction Using Computer Assisted Tomography I (ROMICAT I) study. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared cost and hospital length of stay of UC observed among 368 patients enrolled in the ROMICAT I study with projected costs of management based on cCTA. Costs of UC were determined by an electronic cost accounting system. Notably, UC was not influenced by cCTA results because patients and caregivers were blinded to the cCTA results. Costs after early implementation of cCTA were estimated assuming changes in management based on cCTA findings of the presence and severity of CAD. Sensitivity analysis was used to test the influence of key variables on both outcomes and costs. We determined that in comparison with UC, cCTA-guided triage, whereby patients with no CAD are discharged, could reduce total hospital costs by 23% (P<0.001). However, when the prevalence of obstructive CAD increases, index hospitalization cost increases such that when the prevalence of ≥ 50% stenosis is >28% to 33%, the use of cCTA becomes more costly than UC. CONCLUSIONS: cCTA may be a cost-saving tool in acute chest pain populations that have a prevalence of potentially obstructive CAD <30%. However, increased cost would be anticipated in populations with higher prevalence of disease.