Key result
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was highly cost-effective compared with standard care in Chilean ACS survivors, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $666 to $1247.
Why the study?
Is exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation cost-effective compared with standard care in survivors of acute coronary syndrome in Chile?
Is exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation cost-effective compared with standard care in survivors of acute coronary syndrome in Chile?
Effect estimate: ICER $722 (standard), $1247 (South American), $666 (low-resource)
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is highly cost-effective for survivors of acute coronary syndrome within the Chilean public health system.
Supports integration into Chilean ACS care; extends cost-effectiveness data to Latin America but leaves broader adoption open.
PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of 3 models of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) compared with standard care in survivors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within the public health system in Chile. METHODS: A Markov model was designed using 5 health states: ACS survivor, second ACS, complications, general mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. The transition probabilities between health states for standard care and corresponding relative risk for CR were calculated from a systematic review. Health benefits were measured with the EuroQol 5-dimensional 3-level (EQ-5D-3L) survey. Costs for each health state were quantified using the national cost verification study. The CR cost was estimated with a microcosting methodology. The time horizon was a lifetime and the discount rate was 3% per year for costs and benefits. Deterministic and probabilistic analyses were performed. Structural uncertainty was managed by designing 3 scenarios: CR as currently delivered in a specific Chilean public health center, CR as recommended by South American guidelines, and CR as proposed for low-resource settings. RESULTS: Cardiac rehabilitation versus standard care showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the standard model of $722, for the South American model of $1247, and for the low-resource model of $666. The tornado diagram showed higher uncertainty in relative risk for the complications state and for the second ACS state. CONCLUSION: Considering a cost-effectiveness threshold of 1 unit of gross domestic product per capita (∼$19 000), CR is highly cost-effective for the public health system in Chile.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Serón et al. (2018) studied Acute coronary syndrome. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. Standard care was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER $722 (standard), $1247 (South American), $666 (low-resource)). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was highly cost-effective compared with standard care in Chilean ACS survivors, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $666 to $1247.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: