Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting

AIMS: Hospital admissions of patients with chest pain considered as low risk for acute coronary syndrome contribute to increased costs and crowding in the emergency departments. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of assessing these patients in a primary care emergency setting, using...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johannessen, Tonje R., Halvorsen, Sigrun, Atar, Dan, Munkhaugen, John, Nore, Anne Kathrine, Wisløff, Torbjørn, Vallersnes, Odd Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9587629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36271364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08697-6
_version_ 1784813948698099712
author Johannessen, Tonje R.
Halvorsen, Sigrun
Atar, Dan
Munkhaugen, John
Nore, Anne Kathrine
Wisløff, Torbjørn
Vallersnes, Odd Martin
author_facet Johannessen, Tonje R.
Halvorsen, Sigrun
Atar, Dan
Munkhaugen, John
Nore, Anne Kathrine
Wisløff, Torbjørn
Vallersnes, Odd Martin
author_sort Johannessen, Tonje R.
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Hospital admissions of patients with chest pain considered as low risk for acute coronary syndrome contribute to increased costs and crowding in the emergency departments. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of assessing these patients in a primary care emergency setting, using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-h algorithm for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, compared to routine hospital management. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. For the primary care estimates, costs and health care expenditure from the observational OUT-ACS (One-hoUr Troponin in a low-prevalence population of Acute Coronary Syndrome) study were compared with anonymous extracted administrative data on low-risk patients at a large general hospital in Norway. Patients discharged home after the hs-cTnT assessment were defined as low risk in the primary care cohort. In the hospital setting, the low-risk group comprised patients discharged with a non-specific chest pain diagnosis (ICD-10 codes R07.4 and Z03.5). Loss of health related to a potential increase in acute myocardial infarctions the following 30-days was estimated. The primary outcome measure was the costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of applying the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in primary care. The secondary outcomes were health care costs and length of stay in the two settings. RESULTS: Differences in costs comprise personnel and laboratory costs of applying the algorithm at primary care level (€192) and expenses related to ambulance transports and complete hospital costs for low-risk patients admitted to hospital (€1986). Additional diagnostic procedures were performed in 31.9% (181/567) of the low-risk hospital cohort. The estimated reduction in health care cost when using the 0/1-h algorithm outside of hospital was €1794 per low-risk patient, with a mean decrease in length of stay of 18.9 h. These numbers result in an average per-person QALY gain of 0.0005. Increased QALY and decreased costs indicate that the primary care approach is clearly cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Using the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in low-risk patients in emergency primary care appears to be cost-effective compared to standard hospital management, with an extensive reduction in costs and length of stay per patient. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08697-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9587629
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95876292022-10-23 Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting Johannessen, Tonje R. Halvorsen, Sigrun Atar, Dan Munkhaugen, John Nore, Anne Kathrine Wisløff, Torbjørn Vallersnes, Odd Martin BMC Health Serv Res Research AIMS: Hospital admissions of patients with chest pain considered as low risk for acute coronary syndrome contribute to increased costs and crowding in the emergency departments. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of assessing these patients in a primary care emergency setting, using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-h algorithm for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, compared to routine hospital management. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. For the primary care estimates, costs and health care expenditure from the observational OUT-ACS (One-hoUr Troponin in a low-prevalence population of Acute Coronary Syndrome) study were compared with anonymous extracted administrative data on low-risk patients at a large general hospital in Norway. Patients discharged home after the hs-cTnT assessment were defined as low risk in the primary care cohort. In the hospital setting, the low-risk group comprised patients discharged with a non-specific chest pain diagnosis (ICD-10 codes R07.4 and Z03.5). Loss of health related to a potential increase in acute myocardial infarctions the following 30-days was estimated. The primary outcome measure was the costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of applying the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in primary care. The secondary outcomes were health care costs and length of stay in the two settings. RESULTS: Differences in costs comprise personnel and laboratory costs of applying the algorithm at primary care level (€192) and expenses related to ambulance transports and complete hospital costs for low-risk patients admitted to hospital (€1986). Additional diagnostic procedures were performed in 31.9% (181/567) of the low-risk hospital cohort. The estimated reduction in health care cost when using the 0/1-h algorithm outside of hospital was €1794 per low-risk patient, with a mean decrease in length of stay of 18.9 h. These numbers result in an average per-person QALY gain of 0.0005. Increased QALY and decreased costs indicate that the primary care approach is clearly cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Using the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in low-risk patients in emergency primary care appears to be cost-effective compared to standard hospital management, with an extensive reduction in costs and length of stay per patient. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08697-6. BioMed Central 2022-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9587629/ /pubmed/36271364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08697-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Johannessen, Tonje R.
Halvorsen, Sigrun
Atar, Dan
Munkhaugen, John
Nore, Anne Kathrine
Wisløff, Torbjørn
Vallersnes, Odd Martin
Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title_full Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title_short Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
title_sort cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9587629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36271364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08697-6
work_keys_str_mv AT johannessentonjer costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT halvorsensigrun costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT atardan costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT munkhaugenjohn costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT noreannekathrine costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT wisløfftorbjørn costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting
AT vallersnesoddmartin costeffectivenessofaruleoutalgorithmofacutemyocardialinfarctioninlowriskpatientsemergencyprimarycareversushospitalsetting