Abstract 29: Cost-effectiveness of Inpatient Case Management for Heart Failure Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lakshmi Gopalakrishnan ◽  
Loay Kabbani ◽  
Sarah Brown ◽  
Rachel Goodman ◽  
Ana Montoya ◽  
...  

Background: Prior studies have demonstrated that approximately 5.7 million Americans suffer from heart failure (HF). The direct costs of HF have been estimated at $39.3 billion, and the annual cost of unplanned readmissions is approximately $17.4 billion. Many interventions have been implemented in order to decrease healthcare costs and burden of this disease. Case management (CM) is an intervention that has been utilized in inpatient and outpatient settings. The purpose of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of using CM in addition to usual care in a tertiary hospital that has a large HF population to decrease the 30-day readmission rate. Objectives: We hypothesize that the addition of CM to provide transitional care services to HF patients will decrease 30-day readmission rate, consequently decreasing healthcare utilization costs and improving patient’s quality of life (QoL). Methods: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision analytic model that incorporated Markov processes to evaluate the use of CM for HF patients. We compared two different management strategies following index HF hospitalization: ‘usual care’ versus ‘usual care plus CM’. Our analysis was conducted from a societal perspective with estimated key cost parameters based on established Diagnosis-related Groups (DRGs) and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Lastly, patients’ quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured by days spent out of the hospital. Results: In our analysis, ’usual care plus CM’ resulted in cost savings of $696.58 per patient when compared to ‘usual care’ alone for an ACO based health system with large HF patient volume. In addition, ‘usual care plus CM’ was associated with shorter inpatient stay (decrease in 0.35 inpatient days), and a slight increase in QALYs by 0.003. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that ACO-based health system’s investment in CM in addition to usual care decrease the cost per discharge of complex HF patients.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Song-Yi Kim ◽  
Hyangsook Lee ◽  
Younbyoung Chae ◽  
Hi-Joon Park ◽  
Hyejung Lee

Objective To summarise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Methods We identified full economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the consequences and costs of acupuncture for any medical condition. Eleven electronic databases were searched up to March 2011 without language restrictions. Eligible RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane criteria for risk of bias and a modified version of the checklist for economic evaluation. The general characteristics and the results of each economic analysis such as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were extracted. Results Of 17 included studies, nine were CUAs that measured quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and eight were CEAs that assessed effectiveness of acupuncture based on improvements in clinical symptoms. All CUAs showed that acupuncture with or without usual care was cost-effective compared with waiting list control or usual care alone, with ICERs ranging from ¢3011/QALY (dysmenorrhoea) to ¢22 298/QALY (allergic rhinitis) in German studies, and from £3855/QALY (osteoarthritis) to £9951/QALY (headache) in UK studies. In the CEAs, acupuncture was beneficial at a relatively low cost in six European and Asian studies. All CUAs were well-designed with a low risk of bias, but this was not the case for CEAs. Conclusions Overall, this review demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Despite such promising results, any generalisation of these results needs to be made with caution given the diversity of diseases and the different status of acupuncture in the various countries.


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 576-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Taheri ◽  
Elham Heidari ◽  
Mohammad Ali Aivazi ◽  
Mehran Shams-Beyranvand ◽  
Mehdi Varmaghani

Objectives:This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ivabradine plus standard of care (SoC) in comparison with current SoC alone from the Iranian payer perspective.Methods:A cohort-based Markov model was developed to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a 10-year time horizon in a cohort of 1,000 patients. The baseline transition probabilities between New York Heart Association (NYHA), mortality rate, and hospitalization rate were extracted from the literature. The effect of ivabradine on mortality, hospitalization, and NYHA improvement or worsening were retrieved from the SHIFT study. The effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) using the utility values derived from Iranian Heart Failure Quality of Life study. Direct medical costs were obtained from hospital records and national tariffs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to show the robustness of the model.Results:Ivabradine therapy was associated with an incremental cost per QALY of USD $5,437 (incremental cost of USD $2,207 and QALYs gained 0.41) versus SoC. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ivabradine is expected to have a 60 percent chance of being cost-effective accepting a threshold of USD $6,550 per QALY. Furthermore, deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the model is sensitive to the ivabradine drug acquisition cost.Conclusions:The cost-effectiveness model suggested that the addition of ivabradine to SoC therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes along with increased costs. The analysis indicates that the clinical benefit of ivabradine can be achieved at a reasonable cost in eligible heart failure patients with sinus rhythm and a baseline heart rate ≥ 75 beats per minute (bpm).


Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander T Sandhu ◽  
Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert ◽  
Mintu P Turakhia ◽  
Daniel W Kaiser ◽  
Paul A Heidenreich

Background: For management of heart failure, the value of the CardioMems device remains uncertain. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of the CardioMems device. Methods: We developed a Markov model to determine quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost, and cost-effectiveness of patients with heart failure receiving CardioMems implantation compared to those with routine care. In the main case analysis, we modeled the intervention in the CHAMPION trial cohort, which included patients with NYHA Class III heart failure with a heart failure hospitalization within the past twelve months. We also performed subgroup analyses of patients with preserved ejection fraction or reduced ejection fraction, and a scenario analysis of a second cohort of patients from the CHARM trials with a previous heart failure hospitalization. We obtained event rates and utilities from published trial data; we used costs from literature estimates and Medicare payment data. The main case analysis was calibrated to the hospitalization and survival rates of the CHAMPION trial. Results: In the CHAMPION trial main case analysis, CardioMems reduced lifetime hospitalizations (2.37 versus 3.27), increased months of survival (67 versus 62), increased QALYs (2.66 versus 2.38) and increased costs ($171,132 versus $154,084), yielding a cost of $59,520 per QALY gained or $40,301 per life-year gained. The cost per QALY gained was $71,964 in patients with reduced ejection fraction compared to $34,899 in those with preserved ejection fraction. In less ill patients from the CHARM trials, which included patients with NYHA Class II heart failure, the device cost increased to $110,565 per QALY gained. If the device cost decreased from $17,500 in the main case analysis to $15,000, the intervention would cost less than $50,000 per QALY gained. The duration of effectiveness was initially assumed to be lifelong; if less than 29 months, CardioMems would cost more than $150,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion: The CardioMems device is cost-effective in populations similar to the CHAMPION trial, with a cost of less than $100,000 per QALY gained, if durability of device effectiveness is sustained. Post-marketing surveillance data on the device’s durability will further clarify its value.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 5033
Author(s):  
NamKwen Kim ◽  
Kyung-Min Shin ◽  
Eun-Sung Seo ◽  
Minjung Park ◽  
Hye-Yoon Lee

Electroacupuncture (EA) is used to treat pain after back surgery. Although this treatment is covered by national health insurance in Korea, evidence supporting its cost-effectiveness and contribution to the sustainability of the national health care system has yet to be published. Therefore, an economic evaluation, alongside a clinical trial, was conducted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of EA and usual care (UC) versus UC alone to treat non-acute low back pain (LBP). In total, 108 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to treatment groups; 106 were included in the final cost utility analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EA plus UC was estimated as 7,048,602 Korean Rate Won (KRW) per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from the societal perspective (SP). If the national threshold was KRW 30 million per QALY, the cost-effectiveness probability of EA plus UC was an estimated 85.9%; and, if the national threshold was over KRW 42,496,372 per QALY, the cost-effectiveness probability would be over 95% percent statistical significance. Based on these results, EA plus UC combination therapy for patients with non-acute LBP may be cost-effective from a societal perspective in Korea.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 554-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Chandler ◽  
Clyde B. Schechter ◽  
Jinani Jayasekera ◽  
Aimee Near ◽  
Suzanne C. O’Neill ◽  
...  

Purpose Gene expression profile (GEP) testing can support chemotherapy decision making for patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor 2–negative breast cancers. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of one GEP test, Onco type DX (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA), in community practice with test-eligible patients age 40 to 79 years. Methods A simulation model compared 25-year societal incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of community Onco type DX use from 2005 to 2012 versus usual care in the pretesting era (2000 to 2004). Inputs included Onco type DX and chemotherapy data from an integrated health care system and national and published data on Onco type DX accuracy, chemotherapy effectiveness, utilities, survival and recurrence, and Medicare and patient costs. Sensitivity analyses varied individual parameters; results were also estimated for ideal conditions (ie, 100% testing and adherence to test-suggested treatment, perfect test accuracy, considering test effects on reassurance or worry, and lowest costs). Results Twenty-four percent of test-eligible patients had Onco type DX testing. Testing was higher in younger patients and patients with stage I disease ( v stage IIA), and 75.3% and 10.2% of patients with high and low recurrence risk scores received chemotherapy, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio for testing ( v usual care) was $188,125 per QALY. Considering test effects on worry versus reassurance decreased the cost-effectiveness ratio to $58,431 per QALY. With perfect test accuracy, the cost-effectiveness ratio was $28,947 per QALY, and under ideal conditions, it was $39,496 per QALY. Conclusion GEP testing is likely to have a high cost-effectiveness ratio on the basis of community practice patterns. However, realistic variations in assumptions about key variables could result in GEP testing having cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of other accepted interventions. The differences in cost-effectiveness ratios on the basis of community versus ideal conditions underscore the importance of considering real-world implementation when assessing the new technology.


Gerontology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 503-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belen Corbacho ◽  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
Caroline Fairhurst ◽  
Catherine E. Hewitt ◽  
Kate Hicks ◽  
...  

Background: Falls are a major cause of morbidity among older people. Multifaceted interventions may be effective in preventing falls and related fractures. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness alongside the REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) trial. Methods: REFORM was a pragmatic multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial in England and Ireland; 1,010 participants (> 65 years) were randomised to receive either a podiatry intervention (n = 493), including foot and ankle strengthening exercises, foot orthoses, new footwear if required, and a falls prevention leaflet, or usual podiatry treatment plus a falls prevention leaflet (n = 517). Primary outcome: incidence of falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. Secondary outcomes: proportion of fallers and quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) which was converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each participant. Differences in mean costs and QALYs at 12 months were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted in accordance with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence reference case standards, using a regression-based approach with costs expressed in GBP (2015 price). The base case analysis used an intention-to-treat approach on the imputed data set using multiple imputation. Results: There was a small, non-statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.73–1.05, p = 0.16). Participants allocated to the intervention group accumulated on average marginally higher QALYs than the usual care participants (mean difference 0.0129, 95% CI –0.0050 to 0.0314). The intervention costs were on average GBP 252 more per participant compared to the usual care participants (95% CI GBP –69 to GBP 589). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between GBP 19,494 and GBP 20,593 per QALY gained, below the conventional National Health Service cost-effectiveness thresholds of GBP 20,000 to GBP 30,000 per additional QALY. The probability that the podiatry intervention is cost-effective at a threshold of GBP 30,000 per QALY gained was 0.65. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: The benefits of the intervention justified the moderate cost. The intervention could be a cost-effective option for falls prevention when compared with usual care in the UK.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Z Ademi ◽  
R Norman ◽  
J Pang ◽  
D Liew ◽  
S Zoungas ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There are no studies that have specifically investigated the cost-effectiveness of cascade screening of children for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and treatment of affected individuals with statins to prevent coronary heart disease (CHD). Purpose This study explores the cost-effectiveness of this strategy from the perspective of the Australian public healthcare system. Methods A lifetime Markov model with four health states (Alive without CHD, Alive with CHD, Dead from fatal CHD, and Dead from other causes) was developed to simulate the progression of ten- year-old children screened for FH and treated immediately with statins if found to have FH. The underlying prevalence of FH in this target population was assumed to be 56.8%, and the sensitivity and specificity of testing was 100%. The comparator was usual care, which assumed that subjects started statins spontaneously at a later point or when they experienced a cardiovascular event. The effect of reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on the risk of a first event at each age assumed that risk was proportional to total lifetime exposure and was implemented using Mendelian randomisation analysis data. Cost and other outcome data were sourced from published sources. Outcome of interests were costs in Australian dollars (AUD), life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of costs per LYG and per QALY gained. All future costs and outcomes were discounted by 5% annually. Results Undiscounted results showed that compared with usual care, cascade screening of ten year-old children for FH and initiation of treatment of affected individuals saved 7.77 LYG and 7.53 QALYs per person over a lifetime. With 5% annual discounting, there were 0.97 LYG and 1.07 QALYs gained per person, at an additional cost of $3,244. These equated to ICERs of $3334 per LYG and $3023 per QALY gained. The equivalent ICERs in USD would be $5089 per LYG gained and $4615 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis showed the results to be robust. Conclusions Compared to usual care, cascade screening of ten year old children for FH and treating affected individuals is likely to be highly cost-effective. Table 1. Granular cost and benefit data Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


2002 ◽  
Vol 22 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 26-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fujian Song ◽  
James Raftery ◽  
Paul Aveyard ◽  
Chris Hyde ◽  
Pelham Barton ◽  
...  

To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion SR for smoking cessation, the authors reviewed published studies and developed a decision analytic model from the UK National Health Services perspective. Irrespective of the methods or assumptions involved, the results of published studies consistently indicated that NRT for smoking cessation is cost-effective. No published studies have evaluated the relative cost-effectiveness of bupropion SR for smoking cessation. The results of the decision analyses indicated that, as compared with advice or counseling alone, the incremental cost per life-years saved is about $1,441~$3,455 for NRT, $920~$2,150 for bupropion SR, and $1,282~$2,836 for NRT plus bupropion SR. The cost-effectiveness of adding NRT and bupropion SR to advice or counseling for smoking cessation is better than many other accepted health care interventions.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 439-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoko Maru ◽  
Joshua Byrnes ◽  
Melinda J Carrington ◽  
Yih-Kai Chan ◽  
Simon Stewart ◽  
...  

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a long-term, nurse-led, multidisciplinary programme of home/clinic visits in preventing progressive cardiac dysfunction in patients at risk of developing de novo chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: A trial-based analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic, single-centre, open-label, randomized controlled trial of 611 patients (mean age: 66 years) with subclinical cardiovascular diseases (without CHF) discharged to home from an Australian tertiary referral hospital. A nurse-led home and clinic-based programme (NIL-CHF intervention, n = 301) was compared with standard care ( n=310) in terms of life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and healthcare costs. The uncertainty around the incremental cost and QALYs was quantified by bootstrap simulations and displayed on a cost-effectiveness plane. Results: During a median follow-up of 4.2 years, there were no significant between-group differences in life-years (−0.056, p=0.488) and QALYs (−0.072, p=0.399), which were lower in the NIL-CHF group. The NIL-CHF group had slightly lower all-cause hospitalization costs (AUD$2943 per person; p=0.219), cardiovascular-related hospitalization costs (AUD$1142; p=0.592) and a more pronounced reduction in emergency/unplanned hospitalization costs (AUD$4194 per person; p=0.024). When the cost of intervention was added to all-cause, cardiovascular and emergency-related readmissions, the reductions in the NIL-CHF group were AUD$2742 ( p=0.313), AUD$941 ( p=0.719) and AUD$3993 ( p=0.046), respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of AUD$50,000/QALY, the probability of the NIL-CHF intervention being better-valued was 19%. Conclusions: Compared with standard care, the NIL-CHF intervention was not a cost-effective strategy as life-years and QALYs were slightly lower in the NIL-CHF group. However, it was associated with modest reductions in emergency/unplanned readmission costs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document