Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVE: Given the high disease and cost burden of ischemic stroke, evaluating the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of new approaches to prevent and treat ischemic stroke is critical. Effective ischemic stroke management depends on timely administration of thrombolytics after stroke onset. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness associated with the use of mobile stroke units (MSUs) to expedite tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) administration, as compared with standard management through emergency medical services (EMS). METHODS: This study is a prospective, multicenter, alternating-week, cluster-controlled trial of MSU versus EMS. One-year and life-time cost-effectiveness analyses, using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) method, were performed from the perspective of CMS's Medicare. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) estimated using patient-reported EQ-5D-5L data were used as the effectiveness measure. Health care utilizations were converted to costs using average national Medicare reimbursements. ICERs excluding patients with pre-existing disability, and limited to stroke-related costs were also calculated. RESULTS: The first-year ICER for all tPA-eligible patients using total cost differences between MSU and EMS groups was 238, 873/QALY; for patients without pre-existing disability was 61, 199/QALY. The lifetime ICERs for all tPA-eligible patients and for those without pre-existing disability were 94, 710 and 31, 259/QALY, respectively. All ICERs were lower when restricted to stroke-related costs and were highly dependent on the number of patients treated per year in an MSU. INTERPRETATION: MSUs' cost-effectiveness is borderline if we consider total first-year costs and outcomes in all tPA-eligible patients. MSUs are cost-effective to highly cost-effective when calculations are based on patients without pre-existing disability, patients' lifetime horizon, stroke-related costs, and more patients treated per year in an MSU. ANN NEUROL 2025;97: 209-221.
Rajan et al. (Tue,) studied this question.