The cost-effectiveness of telestroke in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of telestroke--a 2-way, audiovisual technology that links stroke specialists to remote emergency department physicians and their stroke patients--compared to usual care (i.e., remote emergency departments without telestroke consultation or stroke experts).Methods
A decision-analytic model was developed for both 90-day and lifetime horizons. Model inputs were taken from published literature where available and supplemented with western states' telestroke experiences. Costs were gathered using a societal perspective and converted to 2008 US dollars. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained were combined with costs to generate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). In the lifetime horizon model, both costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Both one-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulations were performed.Results
In the base case analysis, compared to usual care, telestroke results in an ICER of $108,363/QALY in the 90-day horizon and $2,449/QALY in the lifetime horizon. For the 90-day and lifetime horizons, 37.5% and 99.7% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations yielded ICERs <$50,000/QALY, a ratio commonly considered acceptable in the United States.Conclusion
When a lifetime perspective is taken, telestroke appears cost-effective compared to usual care, since telestroke costs are upfront but benefits of improved stroke care are lifelong. If barriers to use such as low reimbursement rates and high equipment costs are reduced, telestroke has the potential to diminish the striking geographic disparities of acute stroke care in the United States.
SUBMITTER: Nelson RE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3198982 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionAlteplase is widely used as an intravenous thrombolytic drug in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Recently however, tenecteplase, a modified form of tissue plasminogen activator, has been shown to increase early recanalization rate and has proven to be non-inferior with a similar safety profile compared to alteplase. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase versus 0.9 mg/kg alteplase for intravenous thrombolysis in AIS patients from the Dutch healthcare payer perspective.MethodsA Markov decision-analytic model was constructed to assess total costs, total quality-adjusted life year (QALY), an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of two treatments at willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of €50,000/QALY and €80,000/QALY over a 10-year time horizon. One-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and scenario analysis were conducted to test the robustness of results. Clinical data were obtained from large randomized controlled trials and real-world data.ResultsTreatment with tenecteplase saved €21 per patient while gaining 0.05 QALYs, resulting in INMB of €2381, clearly rendering tenecteplase cost-effective compared to alteplase. Importantly, tenecteplase remained the cost-effective alternative in all scenarios, including AIS patients due to large vessel occlusion (LVO). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis proved tenecteplase to be cost-effective with a 71.0% probability at a WTP threshold of €50,000/QALY.ConclusionsTenecteplase treatment was cost-effective for all AIS patients (including AIS patients with LVO) compared to alteplase. The finding supports the broader use of tenecteplase in acute stroke care, as health outcomes improve at acceptable costs while having practical advantages, and a similar safety profile.
| S-EPMC10472948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeNational guidelines recommend prompt identification of candidates for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) treatment, requiring timely neuroimaging with CT and/or MRI. CT is often preferred because of its widespread availability and rapid acquisition. Despite higher diagnostic accuracy of MRI, it commonly involves complex workflows that could potentially cause treatment time delays. The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact on outcomes of imaging utilization before treatment decisions at comprehensive stroke centers for patients presenting with suspected AIS in the anterior circulation with last-known-well-to-arrival time 0 to 24 hours.MethodsA decision simulation model based on the American Heart Association's recommendations for AIS care pathways was developed from a health care perspective to compare initial imaging strategies: (1) stepwise-CT: noncontrast CT (NCCT) at the time of presentation, with CT angiography (CTA) ± CT perfusion (CTP) only in select patients (initial imaging to exclude hemorrhage and extensive ischemia) for mechanical thrombectomy (MT) evaluation; (2) stepwise-hybrid: NCCT at the time of presentation, with MR angiography (MRA) ± MR perfusion (MRP) only for MT evaluation; (3) stepwise-advanced: NCCT + CTA at presentation, with MR diffusion-weighted imaging (MR DWI) + MRP only for MT evaluation; (4) comprehensive-CT: NCCT + CTA + CTP at the time of presentation; and (5) comprehensive-MR: MR DWI + MRA + MRP at the time of presentation. Model parameters were defined using evidence-based data. Cost-effectiveness and sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsThe cost-effectiveness analyses revealed that comprehensive-CT and comprehensive-MR yield the highest lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (4.81 and 4.82, respectively). However, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of comprehensive-MR is $233,000/QALY compared with comprehensive-CT. Stepwise-CT, stepwise-hybrid, and stepwise-advanced strategies are dominated, yielding lower QALYs and higher costs compared with comprehensive-CT.ConclusionsPerforming comprehensive-CT at presentation is the most cost-effective initial imaging strategy at comprehensive stroke centers.
| S-EPMC8186007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeMechanical thrombectomy (MT) has been recommended for the treatment of nonminor ischemic stroke by national and international guidelines, but cost-effectiveness evidence has been generated for only a few countries using heterogeneous evaluation methods. We estimate the cost-effectiveness of MT across 32 European countries.MethodsA Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of MT compared with standard care over a 5-year time horizon. Patients with ischemic stroke eligible for MT were identified from 2017 country-specific incidence data. A societal perspective was adopted, including health, social, and informal care costs, and productivity losses. Model outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life years. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of findings.ResultsWe identified 267 514 ischemic stroke cases that were eligible for MT treatment across 32 European countries. MT was found to be more effective and cheaper than standard care in two-thirds of the countries (21/32) and cost-effective in all but one country (Bulgaria). Across Europe, the intervention was estimated to produce over 101 327 additional quality-adjusted life years (95% uncertainty interval, 65 180-149 085) and cost savings of $981 million (€868 million, 95% uncertainty interval, -1544 to 2564) and of $1.7 billion (€1.5 billion, 95% uncertainty interval, -1.2 to 3.6) in health and social care and societal costs, respectively.ConclusionsMT is highly likely to be cost-effective compared with standard care across Europe as a whole and in the vast majority of European countries.
| S-EPMC7834665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of intra-arterial treatment within the 0- to 6-hour window after intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator within 0- to 4.5-hour compared with intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator alone, in the US setting and from a social perspective.A decision analytic model estimated the lifetime costs and outcomes associated with the additional benefit of intra-arterial therapy compared with standard treatment with intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator alone. Model inputs were obtained from published literature, the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) study, and claims databases in the United States. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Treatment benefit was assessed by calculating the cost per QALY gained. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to estimate the overall uncertainty of model results.The addition of intra-arterial therapy compared with standard treatment alone yielded a lifetime gain of 0.7 QALY for an additional cost of $9911, which resulted in a cost of $14 137 per QALY. Multivariable sensitivity analysis predicted cost-effectiveness (?$50 000 per QALY) in 97.6% of simulation runs.Intra-arterial treatment after intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator for patients with anterior circulation strokes within the 6-hour window is likely cost-effective. From a societal perspective, increased investment in access to intra-arterial treatment for acute stroke may be justified.
| S-EPMC4480156 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical trials have demonstrated improved 90-day outcomes for patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with stent retriever thrombectomy plus tissue-type plasminogen activator (SST+tPA) compared with tPA. Previous studies suggested that this strategy may be cost-effective, but models were derived from pooled data and older assumptions.In this prospective economic substudy conducted alongside the SWIFT-PRIME trial (Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke), in-trial costs were measured for patients using detailed medical resource utilization and hospital billing data. Utility weights were assessed at 30 and 90 days using the EuroQol-5 dimension questionnaire. Post-trial costs and life-expectancy were estimated for each surviving patient using a model based on trial data and inputs derived from a contemporary cohort of ischemic stroke survivors.Index hospitalization costs were $17?183 per patient higher for SST+tPA than for tPA ($45?761 versus $28?578; P<0.001), driven by initial procedure costs. Between discharge and 90 days, costs were $4904 per patient lower for SST+tPA than for tPA ($11?270 versus $16?174; P=0.014); total 90-day costs remained higher with SST+tPA ($57?031 versus $44?752; P<0.001). Higher utility values for SST+tPA led to higher in-trial quality-adjusted life years (0.131 versus 0.105; P=0.005). In lifetime projections, SST+tPA was associated with substantial gains in quality-adjusted life years (6.79 versus 5.05), cost savings of $23?203 per patient and was economically dominant when compared with tPA in 90% of bootstrap replicates.Among patients with acute ischemic stroke enrolled in the SWIFT-PRIME trial, SST increased initial treatment costs, but was projected to improve quality-adjusted life-expectancy and reduce healthcare costs over a lifetime horizon compared with tPA.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01657461.
| S-EPMC5461963 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of edaravone dexborneol in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of edaravone dexborneol compared with human urinary kallidinogenase from China's healthcare system perspective.MethodsA combination of the decision tree and Markov model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of edaravone dexborneol versus human urinary kallidinogenase in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke over a lifetime horizon. Efficacy data were derived from pivotal clinical trials of edaravone dexborneol and human urinary kallidinogenase (TASTE trial and RESK trial, respectively) and adjusted using matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Cost and health utility inputs were extracted from published literature and open databases. One-way deterministic sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results.ResultsCompared with human urinary kallidinogenase, edaravone dexborneol generated 0.153 incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with an incremental cost of ¥856, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥5,608 per QALY gained under the willingness-to-pay threshold (one-time gross domestic product per capita). Both one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the base case results.ConclusionsEdaravone dexborneol is a cost-effective treatment choice for acute ischemic stroke patients compared with human urinary kallidinogenase in China.
| S-EPMC10823610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Multimodal CT, including noncontrast CT (NCCT), CT with contrast, CT angiography (CTA), and perfusion CT (CTP), is increasingly used in acute stroke patients to identify candidates for endovascular therapy. Our goal is to explore the cost-effectiveness of multimodal CT as a diagnostic test.A Markov model compared multimodal CT to NCCT in a hypothetical cohort of nonhemorrhagic stroke patients presenting within 3 hours of symptom onset who were potential IV tPA candidates. Patients who failed to improve after IV tPA or in whom IV tPA was contraindicated were candidates for endovascular therapy. Direct costs (2008 USD), outcomes, and probabilities were obtained from the literature.For the 3-month time horizon, multimodal CT had lower costs (-$1,716), had greater quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs, 0.004), and was the cost-effective choice 100% of the time for a willingness-to-pay of $100,000/QALY (probabilistic sensitivity analysis). The number needed to screen with multimodal CT to avoid 1 diagnostic angiogram was 2. Over a lifetime, multimodal CT had lower costs (-$2,058), had greater QALYs (0.008), and was cost-effective, with a 90.1% likelihood, for a willingness-to-pay of $100,000/QALY.Multimodal CT appears to be a cost-saving screening tool over the short term. However, additional data regarding clinical outcomes following multimodal CT-guided intra-arterial treatment are needed before the long-term cost-effectiveness can be suitably addressed. This analysis can be incorporated into future discussions of multimodal CT as a diagnostic test for unselected patients, within and beyond the 3-hour IV tPA time window.
| S-EPMC3033607 | biostudies-other
Project description:Studies have demonstrated that intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV rtPA) is a cost-effective treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Age-specific cost effectiveness has not been well examined. This study estimated age-specific incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of IV rtPA treatment versus no IV rtPA.A Markov model was developed to examine the economic impact of IV rtPA over a 20-year time horizon on four age groups (18-44, 45-64, 65-80, and ?81 years) from the U.S. healthcare sector perspective. The model used health outcomes from a national stroke registry adjusted by parameters from previous literature and current hospitalization costs in 2013 U.S. dollars. Long-term annual costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in the years after a stroke were discounted at 3% per year. Incremental costs, incremental QALYs, and ICERs were estimated and sensitivity analyses were conducted between 2015 and 2017.Use of IV rtPA gained 0.55 QALYs and cost $3,941 more than no IV rtPA for stroke patients aged ?18 years over a 20-year time horizon. IV rtPA was a dominant strategy compared to no IV rtPA for patients aged 18-44 and 45-64 years. For patients aged 65-80 years, IV rtPA gained 0.44 QALYs and cost $4,872 more than no IV rtPA (ICER=$11,132/QALY). For patients aged ?81 years, ICER was estimated at $48,676/QALY.IV rtPA saved costs and improved health outcomes for patients aged 18-64 years and was cost effective for those aged ?65 years. These findings support the use of IV rtPA.
| S-EPMC5819005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThrombolytic treatment (tissue-type plasminogen activator [tPA]) is only recommended for acute ischemic stroke patients with stroke onset time <4.5 hours. tPA is not recommended when stroke onset time is unknown. Diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) and fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI mismatch information has been found to approximate stroke onset time with some accuracy. Therefore, we developed a micro-simulation model to project health outcomes and costs of MRI-based treatment decisions versus no treatment for acute wake-up stroke patients.Methods and findingsThe model assigned simulated patients a true stroke onset time from a specified probability distribution. DWI-FLAIR mismatch estimated stroke onset <4.5 hours with sensitivity and specificity of 0.62 and 0.78, respectively. Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores reflected tPA treatment effectiveness accounting for patients' true stroke onset time. Discounted lifetime costs and benefits (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) were projected for each strategy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the MRI-based strategy in base-case and sensitivity analyses. With no treatment, 45.1% of simulated patients experienced a good stroke outcome (mRS score 0-1). Under the MRI-based strategy, in which 17.0% of all patients received tPA despite stroke onset times >4.5 hours, 46.3% experienced a good stroke outcome. Lifetime discounted QALYs and costs were 5.312 and $88,247 for the no treatment strategy and 5.342 and $90,869 for the MRI-based strategy, resulting in an ICER of $88,000/QALY. Results were sensitive to variations in patient- and provider-specific factors such as sleep duration, hospital travel and door-to-needle times, as well as onset probability distribution, MRI specificity, and mRS utility values.ConclusionsOur model-based findings suggest that an MRI-based treatment strategy for this population could be cost-effective and quantifies the impact that patient- and provider-specific factors, such as sleep duration, hospital travel and door-to-needle times, could have on the optimal decision for wake-up stroke patients.
| S-EPMC4740488 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn patients with ischemic stroke, endovascular treatment results in a higher rate of recanalization of the affected cerebral artery than systemic intravenous thrombolytic therapy. However, comparison of the clinical efficacy of the two approaches is needed.MethodsWe randomly assigned 362 patients with acute ischemic stroke, within 4.5 hours after onset, to endovascular therapy (intraarterial thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator [t-PA], mechanical clot disruption or retrieval, or a combination of these approaches) or intravenous t-PA. Treatments were to be given as soon as possible after randomization. The primary outcome was survival free of disability (defined as a modified Rankin score of 0 or 1 on a scale of 0 to 6, with 0 indicating no symptoms, 1 no clinically significant disability despite symptoms, and 6 death) at 3 months.ResultsA total of 181 patients were assigned to receive endovascular therapy, and 181 intravenous t-PA. The median time from stroke onset to the start of treatment was 3.75 hours for endovascular therapy and 2.75 hours for intravenous t-PA (P<0.001). At 3 months, 55 patients in the endovascular-therapy group (30.4%) and 63 in the intravenous t-PA group (34.8%) were alive without disability (odds ratio adjusted for age, sex, stroke severity, and atrial fibrillation status at baseline, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 1.14; P=0.16). Fatal or nonfatal symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 7 days occurred in 6% of the patients in each group, and there were no significant differences between groups in the rates of other serious adverse events or the case fatality rate.ConclusionsThe results of this trial in patients with acute ischemic stroke indicate that endovascular therapy is not superior to standard treatment with intravenous t-PA. (Funded by the Italian Medicines Agency, ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00640367.).
| S-EPMC3708480 | biostudies-literature