Trajectory of prehospital delay in patients with acute myocardial infarction in the Japanese health care system

2006 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshimi Fukuoka ◽  
Kathleen Dracup ◽  
Fumio Kobayashi ◽  
Erika Sivarajan Froelicher ◽  
Sally H. Rankin ◽  
...  
2022 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Hofmann ◽  
Tamrat Befekadu Abebe ◽  
Johan Herlitz ◽  
Stefan K. James ◽  
David Erlinge ◽  
...  

Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) occurs frequently and requires considerable health care resources. It is important to ensure that the treatments which are provided are both clinically effective and economically justifiable. Based on recent new evidence, routine oxygen therapy is no longer recommended in MI patients without hypoxemia. By using data from a nationwide randomized clinical trial, we estimated oxygen therapy related cost savings in this important clinical setting.Methods: The DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial randomized 6,629 patients from 35 hospitals across Sweden to oxygen at 6 L/min for 6–12 h or ambient air. Costs for drug and medical supplies, and labor were calculated per patient, for the whole study population, and for the total annual care episodes for MI in Sweden (N = 16,100) with 10 million inhabitants.Results: Per patient, costs were estimated to 36 USD, summing up to a total cost of 119,832 USD for the whole study population allocated to oxygen treatment. Applied to the annual care episodes for MI in Sweden, costs sum up to between 514,060 and 604,777 USD. In the trial, 62 (2%) patients assigned to oxygen and 254 (8%) patients assigned to ambient air developed hypoxemia. A threshold analysis suggested that up to a cut-off of 624 USD spent for hypoxemia treatment related costs per patient, avoiding routine oxygen therapy remains cost saving.Conclusions: Avoiding routine oxygen therapy in patients with suspected or confirmed MI without hypoxemia at baseline saves significant expenditure for the health care system both with regards to medical and human resources.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01787110.


2014 ◽  
Vol 114 (12) ◽  
pp. 1810-1816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina Grønborg Laut ◽  
Jacob Hjort ◽  
Thomas Engstrøm ◽  
Lisette Okkels Jensen ◽  
Hans-Henrik Tilsted Hansen ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin C. Abbott ◽  
Erin M. Bohen ◽  
Christina M. Yuan ◽  
Frederick E. Yeo ◽  
Eric S. Sawyers ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Constance Hilory Tomberlin

There are a multitude of reasons that a teletinnitus program can be beneficial, not only to the patients, but also within the hospital and audiology department. The ability to use technology for the purpose of tinnitus management allows for improved appointment access for all patients, especially those who live at a distance, has been shown to be more cost effective when the patients travel is otherwise monetarily compensated, and allows for multiple patient's to be seen in the same time slots, allowing for greater access to the clinic for the patients wishing to be seen in-house. There is also the patient's excitement in being part of a new technology-based program. The Gulf Coast Veterans Health Care System (GCVHCS) saw the potential benefits of incorporating a teletinnitus program and began implementation in 2013. There were a few hurdles to work through during the beginning organizational process and the initial execution of the program. Since the establishment of the Teletinnitus program, the GCVHCS has seen an enhancement in patient care, reduction in travel compensation, improvement in clinic utilization, clinic availability, the genuine excitement of the use of a new healthcare media amongst staff and patients, and overall patient satisfaction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document