BACKGROUND:Congestive heart failure (CHF) has been shown to affect 5% of the Canadian adult population, and leads to 9.5 deaths per 100 cardiac-related hospitalizations in Canada. The economic outcomes from biventricular pacing for heart failure are not well understood. This study analyzes resource utilization and related costs associated with CHF for patients who receive standard implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) versus those who receive ICD plus biventricular pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: The Canadian analysis of resynchronization therapy in heart failure (CART-HF) study included 72 patients with New York Heart Association class II-IV CHF requiring an ICD. Patients were randomized to receive either ICD + CRT treatment or ICD treatment alone. Medical resource utilization data were collected for 6 months following treatment and were applied to representative costs for the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Resource utilization was subcategorized into pharmacological therapy, physician visits, hospitalizations, adverse events, and productivity losses. RESULTS: Post-treatment, per patient costs for the CRT + ICD treatment group were less than the follow-up costs for patients receiving ICD treatment only in each province. Mean savings for patients receiving biventricular therapy were CAD 2,420 dollars in Quebec and CAD 2,085 dollars in Ontario during the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses indicate that savings in post-implant health-care utilization (hospitalizations and pharmacological therapy) can offset some of the device and procedural costs associated with CRT devices.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Congestive heart failure (CHF) has been shown to affect 5% of the Canadian adult population, and leads to 9.5 deaths per 100 cardiac-related hospitalizations in Canada. The economic outcomes from biventricular pacing for heart failure are not well understood. This study analyzes resource utilization and related costs associated with CHF for patients who receive standard implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) versus those who receive ICD plus biventricular pacing or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: The Canadian analysis of resynchronization therapy in heart failure (CART-HF) study included 72 patients with New York Heart Association class II-IV CHF requiring an ICD. Patients were randomized to receive either ICD + CRT treatment or ICD treatment alone. Medical resource utilization data were collected for 6 months following treatment and were applied to representative costs for the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. Resource utilization was subcategorized into pharmacological therapy, physician visits, hospitalizations, adverse events, and productivity losses. RESULTS: Post-treatment, per patient costs for the CRT + ICD treatment group were less than the follow-up costs for patients receiving ICD treatment only in each province. Mean savings for patients receiving biventricular therapy were CAD 2,420 dollars in Quebec and CAD 2,085 dollars in Ontario during the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses indicate that savings in post-implant health-care utilization (hospitalizations and pharmacological therapy) can offset some of the device and procedural costs associated with CRT devices.