Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation is highly cost-effective for older adults with CHD at ~$30,188 per QALY gained.
Why the study?
While cardiac rehabilitation is recommended and effective after acute cardiac events, it remains underutilized, particularly in older adults.
Is cardiac rehabilitation cost-effective compared to no cardiac rehabilitation in older adults hospitalized for coronary heart disease?
Observational (n=601,099)
Is cardiac rehabilitation cost-effective compared to no cardiac rehabilitation in older adults hospitalized for coronary heart disease?
Effect estimate: ICER $30 188/QALY (95% CI $18 175-$74 484)
Cardiac rehabilitation is highly cost-effective in older Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for coronary heart disease, supporting the need to increase its utilization.
May support broader cardiac rehabilitation access in older CHD patients; extends observational cost data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
PURPOSE: While cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended and effective following acute cardiac events, it remains underutilized, particularly in older adults. A study of 601 099 Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 yr hospitalized for coronary heart disease compared 5-yr mortality in users and nonusers of CR. Using instrumental variables (IV), CR improved mortality by 8.0% ( P < .001). A validation analysis based on 70 040 propensity-based (PB) matched pairs gave a similar gain (8.3%, P < .0001). The present cost-effectiveness analysis builds on these mortality results. METHODS: Using the framework of the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) gained due to CR. We accessed the costs from this cohort, inflated to 2022 prices, and assessed the relationship of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) to life years from a systematic review. We estimated the ICER of CR by modeling lifetime costs and QALY from national life tables using IV and PB. RESULTS: Using IV, CR added 1.344 QALY (95% CI, 0.543-2.144) and $40 472 in costs over the remaining lifetimes of participants. The ICER was $30 188 (95% CI, $18 175-$74 484)/QALY over their lifetimes. Using the PB analysis, the corresponding lifetime values were 2.018 (95% CI, 1.001-3.035) QALY, $66 590, and an ICER of $32 996 (95% CI, $21 942-$66 494)/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac rehabilitation was highly cost-effective using guidelines established by the World Health Organization and the US Department of Health and Human Services. The favorable clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CR, along with low use by Medicare beneficiaries, support the need to increase CR use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shepard et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Coronary Heart Disease (n=601,099). Cardiac rehabilitation vs. Nonusers of cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained (ICER $30 188/QALY, 95% CI $18 175-$74 484). Cardiac rehabilitation in older adults with coronary heart disease was highly cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $30,188 per QALY gained (95% CI, $18,175-$74,484).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: