Cargando…
Major drivers of healthcare system costs and cost variability for routine atrial fibrillation ablation
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) but incurs significant financial costs to payers. Reducing variability may improve cost effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to measure (1) the components of direct and indirect costs for routine AF ablation procedur...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37124552 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hroo.2022.12.014 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) but incurs significant financial costs to payers. Reducing variability may improve cost effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to measure (1) the components of direct and indirect costs for routine AF ablation procedures, (2) the variability of those costs, and (3) the main factors driving ablation cost variability. METHODS: Using data from the University of Utah Health Value Driven Outcomes system, we were able to measure direct, inflation-adjusted costs of uncomplicated, routine AF ablation to the healthcare system. Direct costs were considered costs incurred by pharmacy, disposable supplies, patient labs, implants, and other services categories (primarily anesthesia support) and indirect costs were considered within imaging, facility, and electrophysiology lab management categories. RESULTS: A total of 910 patients with 1060 outpatient ablation encounters were included from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020. Disposable supplies accounted for the largest component of cost with 44.8 ± 9.7%, followed by other services (primarily anesthesia support) with 30.4 ± 7.7% and facility costs with 16.1 ± 5.6%; pharmacy, imaging, and implant costs each contributed <5%. Direct costs were larger than indirect costs (82.4 ± 5.6% vs 17.6 ± 5.6%). Multivariable regression showed that procedure operator was the primary factor associated with AF ablation overall cost (up to 12% differences depending on operator). CONCLUSIONS: Direct costs and other services (primarily anesthesia) drive the majority costs associated with AF ablations. There is significant variability in costs for these routine, uncomplicated AF ablation procedures. The procedure operator, and not patient characteristic, is the main driver for cost variability. |
---|