Cost-effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy versus no thrombolytic therapy for patients following acute myocardial infarction, focusing on the impact of time to treatment on outcome. METHODS: A decision model was developed to assess the benefits, risks, and costs associated with thrombolytic therapy for treatment of acute myocardial infarction compared with standard nonthrombolytic therapy. The model used pooled data from a recent study of nine large randomized, controlled clinical trials and 12-month outcome data from a recently published meta-analysis of thrombolytic therapy trial data. Outcomes were expressed in terms of survival to hospital discharge and survival to 1 year after discharge. The risks of treatment that led to death, morbidity, or added costs were estimated. The model determined excess and marginal costs per death averted to hospital discharge and at 1 year. Results were also estimated in terms of cost per year of life saved. Sensitivity analyses included variations in time to treatment and drug cost. RESULTS: The marginal cost of thrombolytic therapy per death averted at 1 year was $222,344, or $14,438 per year of life saved. For patients treated within 6 hours of acute myocardial infarction, the marginal cost per death averted was $181,536 at 1 year, or $11,788 per year of life saved. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolytic therapy is significantly more cost-effective than many other cardiovascular interventions and compares favorably with other forms of medical therapy. Results suggest that shortening the time to treatment has a critical impact on the cost-effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy.     

Advanced HIV infection treated with zidovudine monotherapy: lifetime values of absolute cost-effectiveness as a pharmacoeconomic reference for future studies evaluating antiretroviral combination treatments. The Osservatorio SIFO sui Farmaci

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the cost and the effectiveness of zidovudine monotherapy in patients with advanced HIV infection and to derive preliminary data on the cost-effectiveness of the triple treatment with saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine compared with zidovudine alone. DESIGN: We used a combined method of survival analysis utilizing both the quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWIST) method and the Gompertz approach. This combined method was applied to assess the absolute cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios of zidovudine monotherapy and to perform a preliminary incremental cost-effectiveness comparison of saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine versus zidovudine alone. The clinical material used in our study was derived from two reports on the treatment of advanced HIV infection. Data of lifetime costs of HIV infection were obtained from published information. RESULTS: In patients with advanced HIV infection treated with zidovudine monotherapy, lifetime survival was 252.1 discounted person-years per 100 patients. Using an average lifetime cost of $93,000 (discounted) per individual, the absolute ratio of cost-effectiveness for zidovudine monotherapy was $36,980 per life-year, while the absolute cost-utility ratio was $47,112 per quality-adjusted life-year. In the comparative analysis of saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine versus zidovudine alone, our calculations showed that the administration of the triple treatment can have an "average" cost-effectiveness, provided that mean lifetime survival per patient (discounted) is improved to at least 3.68 years (with an average survival gain of at least 14 mo per patient). CONCLUSIONS: The values of absolute cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios for zidovudine monotherapy are a useful reference point for further pharmacoeconomic studies in the area of antiretroviral drugs.     

Economic implications of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in treatment of nonresectable colorectal liver metastases. Meta-Analysis Group in Cancer

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with colorectal cancer die of metastases confined to the liver. A meta-analysis recently performed by our group confirmed that in these patients hepatic arterial infusion of 5-fluoro-2'-deoxyuridine, compared with intravenous chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidines or supportive care (including symptom palliation when necessary), improved tumor response. PURPOSE: Because of the high cost of hepatic arterial infusion, we undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis that related the cost of such therapy to its medical efficacy. METHODS: The patient population was drawn from the seven randomized clinical trials included in the meta-analysis and included individual data on 654 patients. Of these seven trials, five compared hepatic arterial infusion and intravenous chemotherapy and two compared hepatic arterial infusion and a control group in which some patients could be left untreated. Patients assigned to receive hepatic arterial infusion made up the hepatic arterial infusion group; the other patients constituted the control group. The measures of efficacy were survival and tumor response. Health-care costs (in 1995 U.S. dollars) were computed over the duration of patient follow-up and were derived from actual costs in two centers, one at Henri Mondor Hospital (Paris, France) and the other at Stanford University Medical Center (Palo Alto, CA). The total cost of treatment included the initial procedure, chemotherapy cycles, and main complications. RESULTS: The mean gain in life expectancy in the hepatic arterial infusion group compared with the control group was 3.2 months (standard error = 1.0 month). For patients treated by hepatic arterial infusion in Paris, the hepatic arterial infusion pump, initial hospitalization, and the entire process (including follow-up and complications) cost, on average, $8400, $15172, and $29562, respectively; in Palo Alto, these costs were $4700, $13784, and $25 208, respectively. For patients in the control groups in Paris and Palo Alto, the total treatment costs were, on average, $9926 and $5928. The additional costs of hepatic arterial infusion over control treatment were $19636 in Paris and $19280 in Palo Alto. The cost-effectiveness (i.e., the additional cost divided by the additional benefit) with respect to survival of the patients in the hepatic arterial infusion group compared with the patients in the control group was $73635 per life-year in Paris and $72300 per life-year in Palo Alto. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The cost-effectiveness of localized chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases is within the range of accepted treatments for serious medical conditions, although it might be considered borderline by policy-makers in some countries. Prospective clinical trials should be conducted to more definitively answer this question.     

Economic and policy implications of adopting paclitaxel as first-line therapy for advanced ovarian cancer: an Ontario perspective

PURPOSE: To determine the potential economic and policy implications that result from incorporating paclitaxel into first-line therapy for stage 3 and 4 ovarian cancer patients in the province of Ontario, Canada. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare cisplatin/cyclophosphamide (CC), a standard therapy, with cisplatin/paclitaxel (CT). Based on survival curves from a clinical trial, mean costs and survival were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted based on altering the duration of paclitaxel infusion, discount rates, and efficacy of paclitaxel. RESULTS: The mean survival duration is prolonged from 2.06 years with the standard therapy to 2.44 years with the paclitaxel combination. The paclitaxel therapy is more expensive, with a mean cost of $17,469 (Canadian) per patient treated with CT compared with $5,228 per patient with CC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is $32,213 per year gained. Sensitivity analyses show that the conclusions remain unchanged. The use of CT as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer patients in Ontario requires an additional $9 million per year over and above the present costs to treat this patient population. CONCLUSION: Although paclitaxel-based therapy prolongs survival, it comes at an increased cost. It may not be possible to fund paclitaxel treatment using resources presently allocated to first-line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer. The policy implications for absorbing the cost of paclitaxel in the context of a publicly funded health care system are discussed.     

Cost-effectiveness of the arthritis self-help course

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Arthritis Self-Help Course in reducing the pain of arthritis, the leading cause of disability in the United States and a common problem among older adults. METHODS: A decision model was used to examine the cost-effectiveness of the Arthritis Self-Help Course among individuals with arthritis over a 4-year analytic horizon from 2 perspectives, namely, society and the health care system. The Arthritis Self-Help Course was assumed to reduce pain by 20% and physician visits for arthritis by 40% among individuals receiving conventional medical therapy. Estimates for program costs, costs for physician visits, and time and transportation costs were derived from the published literature and expert opinion. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on all relevant parameters. Arthritis pain and costs (program, physician visit plus/minus time and transportation) were expressed as cost per person per unit reduction in pain. Because nearly all analyses showed the program to be cost saving, we simply report the reduction in joint pain and the cost savings, because standardizing cost savings is not a useful concept. RESULTS: From both the societal and health care system perspectives, the Arthritis Self-Help Course was cost saving in base-case analyses (reducing pain by 0.9 units while saving $320 and $267, respectively) and throughout the range of reasonable values used in univariate sensitivity analyses. Cost savings were due primarily to reduced physician visits. CONCLUSIONS: The Arthritis Self-Help Course is a cost-saving intervention that further reduces arthritis pain among individuals receiving conventional medical therapy. The benefits for both patients and health care providers warrant its more widespread use as a normal adjunct to conventional therapy.     

Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A three-center study

The charts of 311 patients receiving theophylline (T) and 289 patients receiving ipratropium bromide (IB) for COPD were reviewed to determine the total costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 agents in 3 different health-care settings. A direct cost-accounting method assessed cost, and a Markov decision-analysis model calculated cost-effectiveness. Costs to treat toxic effects were greater for T versus IB. The types and incidences of toxic effects, by drug, were similar among the three centers. Overall costs for T were $121.40 per patient per therapy-month versus $84.56 per patient per therapy-month for IB, as determined by the cost-accounting method. The marginal cost was $366 for T over IB when extrapolated over 1 year using the Markov model. The Markov model also predicted that patients receiving IB had a greater number of complication-free therapy-months (measurement of effectiveness) than patients receiving T. We conclude that treatment with IB was less costly and more cost-effective than T.     

Cost effectiveness of inpatient initiation of antiarrhythmic therapy for supraventricular tachycardias

This study assessed the cost effectiveness of inpatient antiarrhythmic therapy initiation for supraventricular tachycardias using a metaanalysis of proarrhythmic risk and a decision analysis that compared inpatient to outpatient therapy initiation. A MEDLINE search of trials of antiarrhythmic therapy for supraventricular tachycardias was performed, and episodes of cardiac arrest, sudden or unexplained death, syncope, and sustained or unstable ventricular arrhythmias were recorded. A weighted average event rate, by sample size, was calculated and applied to a clinical decision model of therapy initiation in which patients were either hospitalized for 72 hours or treated as outpatients. Fifty-seven drug trials involving 2,822 patients met study criteria. Based on a 72-hour weighted average event rate of 0.63% (95% confidence interval, 0.2% to 1.2%), inpatient therapy initiation cost $19,231 per year of life saved for a 60-year-old patient with a normal life expectancy. Hospitalization remained cost effective when event rates and life expectancies were varied to model hypothetical clinical scenarios. For example, cost-effectiveness ratios for a 40-year-old without structural heart disease and a 60-year-old with structural heart disease were $37,510 and $33,310, respectively, per year of life saved. Thus, a 72-hour hospitalization for antiarrhythmic therapy initiation is cost effective for most patients with supraventricular tachycardias.     

Hospitalization cost offset of a hostility intervention for coronary heart disease patients.

The authors evaluated hospitalization cost offset of hostility management group therapy for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) from a previously published randomized controlled trial (Y. Gidron, K. Davidson, & I. Bata, 1999). Twenty-six male patients with myocardial infarction or unstable angina were randomized to either 2 months of cognitive-behavioral group therapy or an information (control) session. Therapy patients had a shorter average length of hospital stay (n = 13, M = 0.38 days, SD = 0.96) than did control patients (n = 13, M = 2.15 days, SD = 2.6), t(15.2) = -2.29, p = .04, over 6 months following therapy. The average hospitalization costs were significantly lower for therapy patients (M = $245, SD = $627) than for control patients (M = $1,333, SD = $1,609), t(15.6) = -2.27, p = .04. The cost-offset ratio is calculated by dividing the $1,088 of hospitalization savings by the $560 of therapy expense ($1.00:$1.94), indicating that for every $1.00 spent on therapy, there is an approximate savings of $2.00 in hospitalization costs in the following 6 months. These findings support the hospitalization cost offset of hostility-reduction in CHD patients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Doxycycline is a cost-effective therapy for hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND: Doxycycline has a high degree of activity against many common respiratory pathogens and has been used in the outpatient management of lower respiratory tract infections, including pneumonia. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intravenous doxycycline as empirical treatment in hospitalized patients with mild to moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized prospective trial to compare the efficacy of intravenous doxycycline with other routinely used antibiotic regimens in 87 patients admitted with the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia. Forty-three patients were randomized to receive 100 mg of doxycycline intravenously every 12 hours while 44 patients received other antibiotic(s) (control group). The 2 patient groups were comparable in their clinical and laboratory profiles. RESULTS: The mean+/-SD interval between starting an antibiotic and the clinical response was 2.21+/-2.61 days in the doxycycline group compared with 3.84+/-6.39 days in the control group (P = .001). The mean+/-SD length of hospitalization was 4.14+/-3.08 days in the doxycycline group compared with 6.14+/-6.65 days in the control group (P = .04). The median cost of hospitalization was $5126 in the doxycycline group compared with $6528 in the control group (P = .04). The median cost of antibiotic therapy in the doxycycline-treated patients ($33) was significantly lower than in the control group ($170.90) (P<.001). Doxycycline was as efficacious as the other regimens chosen for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. CONCLUSION: Doxycycline is an effective and inexpensive therapy for the empirical treatment of hospitalized patients with mild to moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia.     

Pretreatment evaluation of chronic hepatitis C: risks, benefits, and costs

CONTEXT: Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) infection affects nearly 4 million people in the United States. Treatment with interferon alfa-2b has been limited by its cost and low likelihood of long-term response. OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of alternative pretreatment management strategies for patients with CHC. DESIGN: Decision and cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model to examine prevalence of genotypes, viral load, and histological characteristics in relation to the sustained response rate with treatment. Data were based on a previously published decision model and a MEDLINE literature search for hepatitis C, biopsy, and liver from 1966 to 1996. PATIENTS: A hypothetical population of patients with CHC infection and elevated serum alanine aminotransferase level. INTERVENTIONS: Combinations of liver biopsy, genotyping, and quantitative viral load determination prior to a single 6-month course of interferon alfa-2b; empirical interferon treatment; and conservative management. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of sustained responders, lifetime costs, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life expectancy. RESULTS: Strategies involving hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA testing had marginal cost-effectiveness ratios up to $4400 per discounted quality-adjusted life-year gained but would miss up to 36% of sustained responders. Empirical interferon treatment had a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of $12400 per discounted quality-adjusted life-year gained and reached all potential sustained responders. Strategies involving liver biopsy were more expensive and would miss 6% of sustained responders and yield slightly lower life expectancies. CONCLUSIONS: Routine liver biopsy before treatment with interferon increases the cost of managing patients with CHC without improving health outcomes. Using quantitative HCV RNA testing to guide therapy misses some potential sustained responders. Empirical interferon treatment has a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio within the bounds of other commonly accepted therapies and misses none of the sustained responders.     

Successful treatment of transient acantholytic dermatosis with systemic steroids

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of different types of computer-generated, mailed reminders on the rate of influenza immunization and to analyze the relative cost-effectiveness of the reminders. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Multispecialty group practice. PATIENTS: We studied 24,743 high-risk adult patients aligned with a primary care physician. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to one of four interventions: (1) no reminder, which served as control; (2) a generic postcard; (3) a personalized postcard from their physician; and (4) a personalized letter from their physician, tailored to their health risk. MEASUREMENTS: The immunization rate was measured using billing data. A telephone survey was conducted in a subgroup of patients to measure reactions to the mailed reminders. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness, a model was constructed that integrated the observed effect of the interventions with published data on the effect of immunization on future inpatient health care costs. MAIN RESULTS: All three of the reminders studied increased the influenza vaccination rate when compared with the control group. The vaccination rate was 40.6% in the control group, 43.5% in the generic postcard group, 44.7% in the personalized postcard group, and 45.2% in the tailored letter group. The rates of immunization increased as the intensity of the intervention increased (p < .0001). Seventy-eight percent of patients in the letter group deemed the intervention useful, and 86% reported that they would like to get reminders in the future. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that in a nonepidemic year, the net savings per 100 reminders sent would be $659 for the personalized postcard intervention and $735 for the tailored letter intervention. When these net cost-savings rates were each applied to the entire high-risk cohort of 24,743 patients, the estimated total net savings was $162,940 for the postcard and $181,858 for the tailored letter. CONCLUSIONS: Although the absolute increase in immunization rates with the use of reminders appeared small, the increases translated into substantial cost savings when applied to a large high-risk population. Personalized reminders were somewhat more effective in increasing immunization, and personalized letters tailored to the patients' condition were deemed useful and important by the individuals who received them and had a beneficial indirect effect on patient satisfaction.     

Risperidone versus haloperidol: II. Cost-effectiveness

Australia and Canada are currently the only Western nations with government guidelines for analyzing the cost-effectiveness of drugs. We used guidelines issued by the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee to construct a model for comparing the cost-effectiveness of risperidone and haloperidol over a 2-year period in patients with chronic schizophrenia. Use of clozapine was also included in the analysis as an alternative treatment given to patients who proved unresponsive to therapy with haloperidol or risperidone. Results are expressed in Australian dollars. Cost-effectiveness was determined by using decision-analytic modeling to compare clinical outcomes and costs. The analytic model contained a decision tree for each of the compared agents that tracked the distribution of patients between treatment outcome pathways (i.e., scenarios). Distributions were based on probabilities derived from our meta-analysis results reported elsewhere and from other sources. Each scenario had an associated monetary cost that included all significant direct costs (i.e., hospital costs; outpatient costs; and the cost of drugs, the services of health care professionals, and government-subsidized hostel accommodation). The cost for a given outcome was the sum of costs for all scenarios leading to that outcome. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as the total cost per favorable outcome. The definition of a favorable outcome was one in which the patient was in a response phase at the end of the 2-year period. The probability of a patient experiencing a favorable outcome at the end of 2 years was 78.9% for risperidone versus 58.9% for haloperidol. The total cost of treatment for 2 years was $15,549.00 for risperidone versus $18,332.00 for haloperidol. The expected cost per favorable outcome was $19,709.00 for risperidone and $31,104.00 for haloperidol. Risperidone was more cost-effective than haloperidol and therefore was "dominant" in pharmacoeconomic terms because it produced a higher proportion of favorable outcomes at lower cost. Sensitivity analysis showed that the difference in clinical response rate was a key determinant of cost-effectiveness.     

Cost-effectiveness model of adjunctive lamotrigine for the treatment of epilepsy

OBJECTIVE: To predict the cost-effectiveness of lamotrigine by evaluating the costs and health outcomes in treated patients. BACKGROUND: Lamotrigine adjunctive therapy has been found to be associated with decreased seizure frequency and severity in patients who are refractory to treatment with the older antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHODS: We used a cost-effectiveness clinical decision analysis framework to assess the impact of these clinical benefits on patient health care use. The measure of effectiveness was seizure-free days gained. The measures of health care resource use included hospitalizations, outpatient and emergency department visits, surgery, and AEDs. Medical care use and cost estimates were derived from clinical trial data and published sources. Costs and effectiveness (incremental costs per seizure-free days gained) of lamotrigine adjunctive therapy versus older AEDs were compared in patients refractory to previous treatment during three time periods: the start-up year, the second year when decisions about surgery were made, and all subsequent years. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The model predicts that use of lamotrigine would be associated with an overall reduction in use of other direct medical care resources (hospitalizations, outpatient visits, diagnostic and laboratory tests, and surgery). For a 10-year time horizon, the estimated cost-effectiveness ratio is $6.9 per seizure-free day gained. The model provides a flexible framework to analyze the effect of new antiepileptic drugs.     

Cost and outcome analysis of home parenteral and enteral nutrition

BACKGROUND: Previous estimates of the cost of home parenteral and enteral nutrition (HPEN) have excluded hospitalization costs or were conducted abroad and have limited applicability in the United States. Few studies have used validated measures to determine the effect of home nutrition support on quality of life. METHOD: A cost and clinical outcome analysis was performed by retrospective review of charts of patients receiving HPEN from 1991 to 1996. Questionnaires to determine the influence of therapy on lifestyle (n = 41) and a general health status questionnaire, the short form 36-item survey (n = 39), were mailed to patients. RESULTS: The annual cost per patient for parenteral solutions was $55,193 +/- 30,596 (mean +/- SD) based on Medicare charges and for enteral tube feedings was $9605 +/- 9327. The annual cost of hospitalization ranged from zero to $140,220 in the parenteral nutrition group and from zero to $39,204 in the enteral nutrition group. The annual number of hospitalizations per patient for patients receiving parenteral nutrition ranged from 0.52 to 1.10, compared with 0 to 0.50 in the enteral nutrition population. The health status of HPEN patients was significantly lower (p < .05) in five of the eight short-form 36 health domains compared with the general population. The areas of lifestyle most frequently affected were travel, sleep, exercise and leisure. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the cost of therapy was associated with the direct provision of nutrition, although in some patients the hospitalization expenditure exceeded this cost. Home nutrition support had a significant negative impact on a patient's quality of life and lifestyle.     

Pronounced differences between the native K+ channels and KAT1 and KST1 alpha-subunit homomers of guard cells

BACKGROUND: Stroke occurs concurrently with myocardial infarction (MI) in approximately 30 000 US patients each year. This number is expected to rise with the increasing use of thrombolytic therapy for MI. However, no data exist for the economic effect of stroke in the setting of acute MI (AMI). The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the effect of stroke on medical resource use and costs in AMI patients in the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medical resource use and cost data were prospectively collected for 2566 randomly selected US GUSTO I patients (from 23 105 patients) and for the 321 US GUSTO I patients who developed non-bypass surgery-related stroke during the baseline hospitalization. Follow-up was for 1 year. All costs are expressed in 1993 US dollars. During the baseline hospitalization, stroke was associated with a reduction in cardiac procedure rates and an increase in length of stay, despite a hospital mortality rate of 37%. Together with stroke-related procedural costs of $2220 per patient, the baseline medical costs increased by 44% ($29 242 versus $20 301, P<0.0001). Follow-up medical costs were substantially higher for stroke survivors ($22 400 versus $5282, P<0.0001), dominated by the cost of institutional care. The main determinant for institutional care was discharge disability status. The cumulative 1-year medical costs for stroke patients were $15 092 higher than for no-stroke patients. Hemorrhagic stroke patients had a much higher hospital mortality rate than non-hemorrhagic stroke patients (53% versus 15%, P<0.001), which was associated with approximately $7200 lower mean baseline hospitalization cost. At discharge, hemorrhagic stroke patients were more likely to be disabled (68% versus 46%, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this first large prospective economic study of stroke in AMI patients, we found that strokes were associated with a 60% ($15 092) increase in cumulative 1-year medical costs. Baseline hospitalization costs were 44% higher because of longer mean lengths of stay. Stroke type was a key determinant of baseline cost. Follow-up costs were more than quadrupled for stroke survivors because of the need for institutional care. Disability level was the main determinant of institutional care and thus of follow-up costs.     

Research without billing data. Econometric estimation of patient-specific costs

OBJECTIVES: This article describes a method for computing the cost of care provided to individual patients in health care systems that do not routinely generate billing data, but gather information on patient utilization and total facility costs. METHODS: Aggregate data on cost and utilization were used to estimate how costs vary with characteristics of patients and facilities of the US Department of Veterans Affairs. A set of cost functions was estimated, taking advantage of the department-level organization of the data. Casemix measures were used to determine the costs of acute hospital and long-term care. RESULTS: Hospitalization for medical conditions cost an average of $5,642 per US Health Care Financing Administration diagnosis-related group weight; surgical hospitalizations cost $11,836. Nursing home care cost $197.33 per day, intermediate care cost $280.66 per day, psychiatric care cost $307.33 per day, and domiciliary care cost $111.84 per day. Outpatient visits cost an average of $90.36. These estimates include the cost of physician services. CONCLUSIONS: The econometric method presented here accounts for variation in resource use caused by casemix that is not reflected in length of stay and for the effects of medical education, research, facility size, and wage rates. Data on non-Veteran's Affairs hospital stays suggest that the method accounts for 40% of the variation in acute hospital care costs and is superior to cost estimates based on length of stay or diagnosis-related group weight alone.     

Cost-effectiveness of therapies for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: The most appropriate treatment(s) for patients with atrial fibrillation remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of anti-thrombotic and antiarrhythmic treatment strategies for atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We performed decision and cost-effectiveness analyses using a Markov state transition model. We gathered data from the English-language literature using MEDLINE searches and bibliographies from selected articles. We obtained financial data from nationwide physician-fee references, a medical center's cost accounting system, and one of New England's larger managed care organizations. We examined strategies that included combinations of cardioversion, antiarrhythmic therapy with quinidine, sotalol hydrochloride, or amiodarone, and anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy. RESULTS: For a 65-year-old man with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, any intervention results in a significant gain in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with no specific therapy. Use of aspirin results in the largest incremental gain (1.2 QALYs). Cardioversion followed by the use of amiodarone and warfarin together is the most effective strategy, yielding a gain of 2.3 QALYs compared with no specific therapy. The marginal cost-effectiveness ratios of cardioversion followed by aspirin, with or without amiodarone, are $33800 per QALY and $10800 per QALY, respectively. Cardioversion followed by amiodarone and warfarin has a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of $92400 per QALY compared with amiodarone and aspirin. Strategies that include cardioversion followed by either quinidine or sotalol are both more expensive and less effective than competing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Cardioversion of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation followed by the use of aspirin alone or with amiodarone has a reasonable marginal cost-effectiveness ratio. While cardioversion followed by the use of amiodarone and warfarin results in the greatest gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy, it is expensive (ie, has a high marginal cost-effectiveness ratio) compared with aspirin and amiodarone. Finally, for patients who are bothered little by symptoms of atrial fibrillation, cardioversion followed by either aspirin or warfarin without subsequent antiarrhythmic therapy is the treatment of choice.     

A comparison between emergency diagnostic and treatment unit and inpatient care in the management of acute asthma

BACKGROUND: Emergency diagnostic and treatment units (EDTUs) may provide an alternative to hospitalization for patients with reversible diseases, such as asthma, who fail to adequately respond to emergency department therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the medical and cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and quality of life of patients receiving EDTU care for acute asthma compared with inpatient care. METHODS: A prospective, randomized clinical trial performed at 2 urban public hospitals enrolled patients with acute asthma (age range, 18-55 years) not meeting discharge criteria after 3 hours of emergency department therapy. Patients were treated with inhaled adrenergic agonists and steroids in an EDTU for up to 9 hours after randomization or with routine therapy in a hospital ward. Patients were followed up for 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discharge rate from the EDTU, length of stay, relapse rates, days missed from work or school, days incapacitated during waking hours, symptom-free days and nights, nocturnal awakenings, direct medical costs, patients satisfaction, and patient quality of life. RESULTS: The study consisted of 222 patients with asthma. Sixty-five patients (59%) treated in an EDTU were discharged home; the remainder were admitted to the hospital. There were no differences during the follow-up period in relapse rates (P = .74) or in any other morbidities between the EDTU and inpatient groups. There were significant differences in the length of stay, patient satisfaction, and quality of life favoring EDTU care. The mean (+/-SD) cost per patient in the EDTU group was $1202.79 +/- $1343.96, compared with $2247.32 +/- $1110.18 for the control group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of selected patients with asthma in an EDTU results in the safe discharge of most such patients. This study suggests that quality gains and cost-effective measures can be achieved by the use of such units.