PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 15, 2006Current Medical Research and Opinion26 citations

Modelling the economic and health consequences of cardiac resynchronization therapy in the UK

View Full Paper
JJJ. JaimeSGShien GuoSCShajil Chalil

Key Result

In a 5-year simulation of patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure, CRT reduced mortality by 26% and yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15,247 per QALY gained.

Structured PICO

Is cardiac resynchronization therapy cost-effective compared to optimum pharmacologic treatment alone in patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure in the UK?

P
Population
2,000 simulated patients (1,000 identical pairs) with NYHA class III-IV heart failure, modeled over a 5-year period to compare CRT plus OPT versus OPT alone.
I
Intervention
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) plus optimum pharmacologic treatment (OPT)
C
Comparator
Optimum pharmacologic treatment (OPT) alone
O
Outcome
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained over 5 years

Cardiac resynchronization therapy is a cost-effective intervention for patients with advanced heart failure in the UK, yielding substantial health benefits at an acceptable incremental cost.

Main Result

Effect estimate: ICER £15,247 per QALY gained (95% CI range: 12,531-23,184)

Limitations

  • Outcome was most sensitive to time horizon and cost of implantation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Clinical evidence supports the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in advanced heart failure, but its cost-effectiveness is still unclear. This analysis assessed the economic and health consequences in the UK of implanting a CRT in patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure. METHODS: A discrete event simulation of heart failure was used to compare the course over 5 years of 1000 identical pairs of patients -- one receiving both CRT and optimum pharmacologic treatment (OPT), the other OPT alone. All inputs were obtained from the data collected in the CArdiac REsynchronization in Heart Failure (CARE-HF) trial and a hospital in the UK. Direct medical costs (in 2004 pound) from the perspective of the National Health Service were considered. Both costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. Sensitivity analyses addressed all model inputs and multivariate analyses were performed by varying key parameters simultaneously. RESULTS: The model predicted 471 deaths and 2263 hospitalizations over 5 years with OPT alone and 348 deaths and 1764 hospitalizations with CRT, equivalent to a 26% reduction in mortality and 22% in hospitalizations, at a discounted cost of pound 11,423 per patient with CRT vs. pound 4,900 with OPT alone. CRT was predicted to increase quality-adjusted survival by 0.43 QALYs per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of pound 15,247 per QALY gained (range: pound 12,531- pound 23,184). Sensitivity analyses revealed that this outcome was most sensitive to time horizon and cost of implantation. CONCLUSION: Based on these 5-year analyses, CRT is expected to yield substantial health benefits at a reasonable cost.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Jaime et al. (2006) studied NYHA class III-IV heart failure (n=2,000). Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) + optimum pharmacologic treatment (OPT) vs. Optimum pharmacologic treatment (OPT) alone was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained (ICER £15,247 per QALY gained, 95% CI range: 12,531-23,184). In a 5-year simulation of patients with NYHA class III-IV heart failure, CRT reduced mortality by 26% and yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15,247 per QALY gained.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a858f55f047f857d83db1d6https://doi.org/10.1185/030079906x112516
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper