Literature DB >> 9701102

Cost-effectiveness of therapies for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

M H Eckman1, R H Falk, S G Pauker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The most appropriate treatment(s) for patients with atrial fibrillation remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of anti-thrombotic and antiarrhythmic treatment strategies for atrial fibrillation.
METHODS: We performed decision and cost-effectiveness analyses using a Markov state transition model. We gathered data from the English-language literature using MEDLINE searches and bibliographies from selected articles. We obtained financial data from nationwide physician-fee references, a medical center's cost accounting system, and one of New England's larger managed care organizations. We examined strategies that included combinations of cardioversion, antiarrhythmic therapy with quinidine, sotalol hydrochloride, or amiodarone, and anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy.
RESULTS: For a 65-year-old man with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, any intervention results in a significant gain in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with no specific therapy. Use of aspirin results in the largest incremental gain (1.2 QALYs). Cardioversion followed by the use of amiodarone and warfarin together is the most effective strategy, yielding a gain of 2.3 QALYs compared with no specific therapy. The marginal cost-effectiveness ratios of cardioversion followed by aspirin, with or without amiodarone, are $33800 per QALY and $10800 per QALY, respectively. Cardioversion followed by amiodarone and warfarin has a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of $92400 per QALY compared with amiodarone and aspirin. Strategies that include cardioversion followed by either quinidine or sotalol are both more expensive and less effective than competing strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Cardioversion of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation followed by the use of aspirin alone or with amiodarone has a reasonable marginal cost-effectiveness ratio. While cardioversion followed by the use of amiodarone and warfarin results in the greatest gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy, it is expensive (ie, has a high marginal cost-effectiveness ratio) compared with aspirin and amiodarone. Finally, for patients who are bothered little by symptoms of atrial fibrillation, cardioversion followed by either aspirin or warfarin without subsequent antiarrhythmic therapy is the treatment of choice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9701102     DOI: 10.1001/archinte.158.15.1669

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-9926


  11 in total

1.  Errors in health care management: what do they cost?

Authors:  K D Rigby; J C Litt
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-12

2.  Cost Effectiveness of Operative Versus Non-Operative Treatment of Geriatric Type-II Odontoid Fracture.

Authors:  Daniel R Barlow; Brendan T Higgins; Elissa M Ozanne; Anna N A Tosteson; Adam M Pearson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic agents at promoting sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  G Nichol; F McAlister; B Pham; A Laupacis; B Shea; M Green; A Tang; G Wells
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Initial development of the Temporary Utilities Index: a multiattribute system for classifying the functional health impact of diagnostic testing.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; Jun Ying; James Stahl; Chung Yin Kong; Beverly Moy; Jessica Roy; Elkan Halpern
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with recurrent episodes of atrial fibrillation: the FRACTAL registry.

Authors:  Matthew R Reynolds; Vidal Essebag; Peter Zimetbaum; David J Cohen
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-04-19

Review 6.  Cost effectiveness of therapies for atrial fibrillation. A review.

Authors:  M P Teng; L E Catherwood; D P Melby
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Application of a decision support tool for anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Mark L Wess; Daniel P Schauer; Joseph A Johnston; Charles J Moomaw; David E Brewer; E Francis Cook; Mark H Eckman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Benefits and risks of long-term amiodarone therapy for persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  James F Doyle; Kwok M Ho
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 7.616

9.  Preferences for oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a best-best discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Peter Ghijben; Emily Lancsar; Silva Zavarsek
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Values and preferences in oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation, physicians' and patients' perspectives: protocol for a two-phase study.

Authors:  Pablo Alonso-Coello; Victor M Montori; Ivan Solà; Holger J Schünemann; Philipe Devereaux; Cathy Charles; Mercè Roura; M Gloria Díaz; Juan Carlos Souto; Rafael Alonso; Sven Oliver; Rafael Ruiz; Blanca Coll-Vinent; Ana Isabel Diez; Ignasi Gich; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.