Literature DB >> 7930247

Cost-effectiveness of a new short-stay unit to "rule out" acute myocardial infarction in low risk patients.

J M Gaspoz1, T H Lee, M C Weinstein, E F Cook, P Goldman, A L Komaroff, L Goldman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to determine the safety and costs of a new short-stay unit for low risk patients who may be admitted to a hospital to rule out myocardial infarction or ischemia.
BACKGROUND: One strategy to reduce the costs of ruling out acute myocardial infarction in low risk patients is to develop alternatives to coronary care units.
METHODS: The short-term and 6-month clinical outcomes and costs for 592 patients admitted to a short-stay coronary observation unit at Brigham and Women's Hospital with a low (< or = 10%) probability of acute myocardial infarction were compared with those for 924 consecutive comparison patients who were eligible for the same unit but were admitted to other hospital settings or discharged home. Actual costs were calculated using detailed cost-accounting methods that incorporated nursing intensity weights.
RESULTS: The rate of major complications, recurrent myocardial infarction or cardiac death during 6 months after the initial presentation of the 592 patients admitted to the coronary observation unit was similar to that of the 924 comparison patients before and after adjustment for clinical factors influencing triage and initial diagnoses (adjusted relative risk 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 1.53). Their median total costs (25th, 75th percentile) at 6 months ($1,927; 1,455, 3,650) were significantly lower than for comparison patients admitted to the wards $4,712; 1,868, 11,187), to stepdown or intermediate care units ($4,031; 2,069, 9,169) or to the coronary care unit ($9,201; 3,171, 20,011) but were higher than for comparison patients discharged home from the emergency department ($403; 403,927) before and after the same adjustments (all adjusted p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the coronary observation unit may be a safe and cost-saving alternative to current triage strategies for patients with a low risk of acute myocardial infarction admitted from the emergency department. Its replication in other hospitals should be tested.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7930247     DOI: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)90106-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  33 in total

Review 1.  Guideline for the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes without persistent ECG ST segment elevation. British Cardiac Society Guidelines and Medical Practice Committee and Royal College of Physicians Clinical Effectiveness and Evaluation Unit.

Authors: 
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  Chest pain evaluation units

Authors: 
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2000-12

Review 3.  The limited incorporation of economic analyses in clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Joel F Wallace; Scott R Weingarten; Chiun-Fang Chiou; James M Henning; Andriana A Hohlbauch; Margaret S Richards; Nicole S Herzog; Lior S Lewensztain; Joshua J Ofman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 4.  Cost implications of prehospital emergency drug administration. The case of prehospital thrombolytics.

Authors:  S Barton; T Walley
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Identification of patients with evolving coronary syndromes by using statistical models with data from the time of presentation.

Authors:  R L Kennedy; R F Harrison
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-06-06       Impact factor: 5.994

6.  Waste in the U.S. Health care system: a conceptual framework.

Authors:  Tanya G K Bentley; Rachel M Effros; Kartika Palar; Emmett B Keeler
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.911

7.  Managing demand for secondary care services: the changing context.

Authors:  N Edwards; M Hensher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-07-11

Review 8.  Use of emergency observation and assessment wards: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  M W Cooke; J Higgins; P Kidd
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.740

9.  ROMEO: a rapid rule out strategy for low risk chest pain. Does it work in a UK emergency department?

Authors:  C Taylor; A Forrest-Hay; S Meek
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.740

10.  Observation Units as Substitutes for Hospitalization or Home Discharge.

Authors:  Saul Blecker; Nicholas P Gavin; Hannah Park; Joseph A Ladapo; Stuart D Katz
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 5.721

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.