Cargando…

Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS

BACKGROUND: Acute chest pain is responsible for approximately 700,000 patient attendances per year at emergency departments in England and Wales. A single centre study of selected patients suggested that chest pain unit (CPU) care could be less costly and more effective than routine care for these p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oluboyede, Yemi, Goodacre, Steve, Wailoo, Allan
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2527313/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18700961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-174
_version_ 1782158797587873792
author Oluboyede, Yemi
Goodacre, Steve
Wailoo, Allan
author_facet Oluboyede, Yemi
Goodacre, Steve
Wailoo, Allan
author_sort Oluboyede, Yemi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Acute chest pain is responsible for approximately 700,000 patient attendances per year at emergency departments in England and Wales. A single centre study of selected patients suggested that chest pain unit (CPU) care could be less costly and more effective than routine care for these patients, although a more recent multi-centre study cast doubt on the generalisability of these findings. METHODS: Our economic evaluation involved modelling data from the ESCAPE multi-centre trial along with data from other sources to estimate the comparative costs and effects of CPU versus routine care. Cost effectiveness ratios (cost per QALY) were generated from our model. RESULTS: We found that CPU compared to routine care resulted in a non-significant increase in effectiveness of 0.0075 QALYs per patient and a non-significant cost decrease of £32 per patient and thus a negative incremental cost effectiveness ratio. If we are willing to pay £20,000 for an additional QALY then there is a 70% probability that CPU care will be considered cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CPU care is likely to be slightly more effective and less expensive than routine care, however, these estimates are surrounded by a substantial amount of uncertainty. We cannot reliably conclude that establishing CPU care will represent a cost-effective use of health service resources given the substantial amount of investment it would require.
format Text
id pubmed-2527313
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25273132008-08-30 Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS Oluboyede, Yemi Goodacre, Steve Wailoo, Allan BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Acute chest pain is responsible for approximately 700,000 patient attendances per year at emergency departments in England and Wales. A single centre study of selected patients suggested that chest pain unit (CPU) care could be less costly and more effective than routine care for these patients, although a more recent multi-centre study cast doubt on the generalisability of these findings. METHODS: Our economic evaluation involved modelling data from the ESCAPE multi-centre trial along with data from other sources to estimate the comparative costs and effects of CPU versus routine care. Cost effectiveness ratios (cost per QALY) were generated from our model. RESULTS: We found that CPU compared to routine care resulted in a non-significant increase in effectiveness of 0.0075 QALYs per patient and a non-significant cost decrease of £32 per patient and thus a negative incremental cost effectiveness ratio. If we are willing to pay £20,000 for an additional QALY then there is a 70% probability that CPU care will be considered cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CPU care is likely to be slightly more effective and less expensive than routine care, however, these estimates are surrounded by a substantial amount of uncertainty. We cannot reliably conclude that establishing CPU care will represent a cost-effective use of health service resources given the substantial amount of investment it would require. BioMed Central 2008-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2527313/ /pubmed/18700961 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-174 Text en Copyright © 2008 Oluboyede et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Oluboyede, Yemi
Goodacre, Steve
Wailoo, Allan
Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title_full Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title_fullStr Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title_full_unstemmed Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title_short Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS
title_sort cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the nhs
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2527313/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18700961
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-174
work_keys_str_mv AT oluboyedeyemi costeffectivenessofchestpainunitcareinthenhs
AT goodacresteve costeffectivenessofchestpainunitcareinthenhs
AT wailooallan costeffectivenessofchestpainunitcareinthenhs
AT costeffectivenessofchestpainunitcareinthenhs