Dataset Information

Economic outcome of cardiac CT-based evaluation and standard of care for suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department: a decision analytic model.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale and objectives

Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) in the emergency department may be cost saving for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but economic outcome data are limited. The objective of this study was to compare the cost of CCT-based evaluation versus standard of care (SOC) using the results of a clinical trial.

Materials and methods

We developed a decision analytic cost-minimization model to compare CCT-based and SOC evaluation costs to obtain a correct diagnosis. Model inputs, including Medicare-adjusted patient costs, were primarily obtained from a cohort study of 102 patients at low to intermediate risk for ACS who underwent an emergency department SOC clinical evaluation and a 64-channel CCT. SOC costs included stress testing in 77% of patients. Data from published literature completed the model inputs and expanded data ranges for sensitivity analyses.

Results

Modeled mean patient costs for CCT-based evaluation were $750 (24%) lower than the SOC ($2384 and $3134, respectively). Sensitivity analyses indicated that CCT was less expensive over a wide range of estimates and was only more expensive with a CCT specificity below 67% or if more than 44% of very low risk patients had CCT. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that CCT-based evaluation had a 98.9% probability of being less expensive compared to SOC.

Conclusion

Using a decision analytic model, CCT-based evaluation resulted in overall lower cost than the SOC for possible ACS patients over a wide range of cost and outcome assumptions, including computed tomography-related complications and downstream costs.

SUBMITTER: Branch KR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3274607 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Economic outcome of cardiac CT-based evaluation and standard of care for suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department: a decision analytic model.

Branch Kelley R KR Bresnahan Brian W BW Veenstra David L DL Shuman William P WP Weintraub William S WS Busey Janet M JM Elliott Daniel J DJ Mitsumori Lee M LM Strote Jared J Jobe Kathleen K Dubinsky Ted T Caldwell James H JH

Academic radiology 20111230 3

<h4>Rationale and objectives</h4>Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) in the emergency department may be cost saving for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but economic outcome data are limited. The objective of this study was to compare the cost of CCT-based evaluation versus standard of care (SOC) using the results of a clinical trial.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We developed a decision analytic cost-minimization model to compare CCT-based and SOC evaluation costs to obtain a correct diagn ...[more]

PMID: 22209422

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceProfessional guidelines recommend noninvasive cardiac testing (NIT) within 72 hours of an emergency department (ED) evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome. However, there is inexact evidence that this strategy reduces the risk of future death or acute myocardial infarction (MI).ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of early NIT in reducing the risk of death or acute MI within 30 days.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective, multicenter cohort study within the Kaiser Permanente Southern California integrated health care delivery system compared the effectiveness of early noninvasive cardiac testing vs no testing in patients with chest pain and in whom acute MI was ruled out who presented to an ED from January 2015 to December 2017. Patients were followed up for up to 30 days after emergency department discharge.ExposuresNoninvasive cardiac testing performed within 3 days of an ED evaluation for suspected acute coronary syndrome.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was composite risk of death or acute MI, within 30 days of an ED discharge.ResultsA total of 79 040 patients were evaluated in this study, of whom 57.7% were female. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 57 (16) years, and 16 164 patients (21%) had completed early NIT. The absolute risk of death or MI within 30 days was low (<1%). Early NIT had the minor benefit of reducing the absolute composite risk of death or MI (0.4% [95% CI, -0.6% to -0.3%]), and, separately, of death (0.2% [95% CI, -0.2% to -0.1%]), MI (-0.3% [95% CI, -0.5% to -0.1%]), and major adverse cardiac event (-0.5% [95% CI, -0.7% to -0.3%]). The number needed to treat was 250 to avoid 1 death or MI, 500 to avoid 1 death, 333 to avoid 1 MI, and 200 to avoid 1 major adverse cardiovascular event within 30 days. Subgroup analysis revealed a number needed to treat of 14 to avoid 1 death or MI in the subset of patients with elevated troponin.Conclusions and relevanceEarly NIT was associated with a small decrease in the risk of death or MI in patients admitted to the ED with suspected acute coronary syndrome, but this clinical strategy may not be optimal for most patients given the large number needed to treat.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study sought to assess medical management of patients found to have nonobstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) performed in the emergency department (ED).BackgroundContemporary recognition and management of nonobstructive CAD discovered on CCTA performed in the ED is unknown.MethodsPatients undergoing CCTA in the authors' hospital's ED between November 2013 and March 2018 who also received primary care within the authors' health system were studied. All patients with nonobstructive CAD, defined as 1% to 49% maximum luminal stenosis on CCTA, were included, along with a control group without CAD in a 1 case:1 control fashion. Ten-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prior to CCTA was estimated using the Pooled Cohort Equations. Management changes were recorded until 6 months after CCTA. Multivariate logistic regression tested the association between CCTA result and follow-up statin prescription, adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors and baseline statin use.ResultsThe cohort included 510 patients with nonobstructive CAD and 510 controls. Prevalence of statin prescription increased from 38.8% to 56.1% among patients with nonobstructive CAD (p < 0.001) and 18.0% to 20.4% among controls (p = 0.01), representing a 7.1-fold relative difference (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.4 to 23.0; p < 0.001) in multivariate analysis. However, 30.0% of patients with nonobstructive CAD and ≥20% 10-year ASCVD risk were not prescribed a statin at the end of follow-up. Cardiologist evaluation was independently associated with statin prescription after adjustment for ASCVD risk factors (odds ratio [OR] 4.4; 95% CI: 2.4 to 8.5; p < 0.001). A Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System class 1 to 2 result was associated with lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 12.1 mg/dl at mean 1.9-year follow-up (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIncidental subclinical atherosclerosis on CCTA performed in the ED increases the likelihood of statin prescription, but opportunities to improve allocation of indicated preventive therapies remain.

Project description:Study objectiveProfessional guidelines recommend 72-hour cardiac stress testing after an emergency department (ED) evaluation for possible acute coronary syndrome. There are limited data on actual compliance rates and effect on patient outcomes. Our aim is to describe rates of completion of noninvasive cardiac stress testing and associated 30-day major adverse cardiac events.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of ED encounters from June 2015 to June 2017 across 13 community EDs within an integrated health system in Southern California. The study population included all adults with a chest pain diagnosis, troponin value, and discharge with an order for an outpatient cardiac stress test. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who completed an outpatient stress test within the recommended 3 days, 4 to 30 days, or not at all. Secondary analysis described the 30-day incidence of major adverse cardiac events.ResultsDuring the study period, 24,459 patients presented with a chest pain evaluation requiring troponin analysis and stress test ordering from the ED. Of these, we studied the 7,988 patients who were discharged home to complete diagnostic testing, having been deemed appropriate by the treating clinicians for an outpatient stress test. The stress test completion rate was 31.3% within 3 days and 58.7% between 4 and 30 days, and 10.0% of patients did not complete the ordered test. The 30-day rates of major adverse cardiac events were low (death 0.0%, acute myocardial infarction 0.7%, and revascularization 0.3%). Rapid receipt of stress testing was not associated with improved 30-day major adverse cardiac events (odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.54).ConclusionLess than one third of patients completed outpatient stress testing within the guideline-recommended 3 days after initial evaluation. More important, the low adverse event rates suggest that selective outpatient stress testing is safe. In this cohort of patients selected for outpatient cardiac stress testing in a well-integrated health system, there does not appear to be any associated benefit of stress testing within 3 days, nor within 30 days, compared with those who never received testing at all. The lack of benefit of obtaining timely testing, in combination with low rates of objective adverse events, may warrant reassessment of the current guidelines.

Project description:AimsCoronary computed tomography angiography is increasingly employed in the emergency department for suspected acute coronary syndrome patients. The HEART score has been proposed for initial risk stratification in these patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value and efficiency of the HEART score before coronary computed tomography angiography.Methods and resultsWe included patients suspected of acute coronary syndrome who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography in the emergency department. Based on the HEART score, patients were stratified as low-risk (HEART≤3), intermediate-risk (HEART4-6) and high-risk (HEART≥7). We assessed coronary computed tomography angiography for the presence of significant coronary artery disease (>50% stenosis). The primary outcome, the level of major adverse cardiac events, was a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation within 30 days. The study population consisted of 340 patients (mean age: 55.6±10.1 years, 44.7% women), major adverse cardiac events occurred in 45 (13.2%) patients. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events in patients stratified as low-risk (35.0%), intermediate-risk (56.8%) and high-risk (8.2%) was 3.4%, 12.4% and 60.7%, respectively. All four low-risk patients with major adverse cardiac events had a HEART score of three. An algorithm where coronary computed tomography angiography is reserved for patients with HEART 3-6 resulted in a sensitivity of 97.8%, specificity of 84.1%, negative predictive value of 99.6% and positive predictive value of 48.4%, while reducing the need for coronary computed tomography angiography by 22% (n=75).ConclusionThe predictive value of coronary computed tomography angiography for 30-day major adverse cardiac events in suspected acute coronary syndrome patients is good, and reserving coronary computed tomography angiography for HEART score 3-6 patients reduces the number of needed coronary computed tomography angiograms without affecting diagnostic accuracy.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR), the Canadian Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) Score, and the Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH) Rule have all previously demonstrated the potential to significantly standardize care and improve the management of patients in emergency departments (EDs). On the basis of user feedback, we believe that the addition of these rules to the Ottawa Rules App has the potential to increase the app's usability and user acceptability. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate the perceived usefulness, acceptability, and uptake of the enhanced Ottawa Rules App (which now includes CCHR, TIA, and SAH Rules) among ED clinicians (medical students, residents, nurses, and physicians). METHODS:The enhanced Ottawa Rules App was publicly released for free on iOS and Android operating systems in November 2018. This study was conducted across 2 tertiary EDs in Ottawa, Canada. Posters, direct enrollment, snowball sampling, and emails were used for study recruitment. A 24-question Web-based survey was administered to participants via email, and this was used to determine user acceptability of the app and Technology Readiness Index (TRI) scores. In-app user analytics were collected to track user behavior, such as the number of app sessions, length of app sessions, frequency of rule use, and the date app was first opened. RESULTS:A total of 77 ED clinicians completed the study, including 34 nurses, 12 residents, 14 physicians, and 17 medical students completing ED rotations. The median TRI score for this group was 3.38, indicating a higher than average propensity to embrace and adopt new technologies to accomplish goals in their work or daily lives. The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the app helped participants accurately carry out the clinical rules (56/77, 73%) and that they would recommend this app to their colleagues (64/77, 83%). Feedback from study participants suggested further expansion of the app-more clinical decision rules (CDRs) and different versions of the app tailored to the clinician role. Analysis and comparison of Google Analytics data and in-app data revealed similar usage behavior among study-enrolled users and all app users globally. CONCLUSIONS:This study provides evidence that using the Ottawa Rules App (version 3.0.2) to improve and guide patient care would be feasible and widely accepted. The ability to verify self-reported user data (via a Web-based survey) against server analytics data is a notable strength of this study. Participants' continued app use and request for the addition of more CDRs warrant the further development of this app and call for additional studies to evaluate its feasibility and usability in different settings as well as assessment of clinical impact.

Project description:ObjectivesOne major goal of the emergency department (ED) is to decide, whether patients need to be hospitalised or can be sent home safely. We aim at providing criteria for these decisions without knowing the SARS-CoV-2 test result in suspected cases.SettingTertiary emergency medicine.ParticipantsAll patients were treated at the ED of the Charité during the pandemic peak and underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. Patients with positive test results were characterised in detail and underwent a 14-day-follow-up.Primary and secondary outcome measuresLogistic regression and classification and regression tree (CART) analyses were performed to identify predictors (primary endpoint), which confirm safe discharge. The clinical endpoint was all-cause mortality or need for mechanical ventilation during index stay or after readmission.ResultsThe primary test population of suspected COVID-19 consisted of n=1255 cases, 45.2% were women (n=567). Of these, n=110 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (8.8%). The median age of SARS-CoV-2-positive cases was 45 years (IQR: 33-66 years), whereas the median age of the group tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 was 42 years (IQR: 30-60 years) (p=0.096). 43.6% were directly admitted to hospital care.CART analysis identified the variables oxygen saturation (<95%), dyspnoea and history of cardiovascular (CV) disease to distinguish between high and low-risk groups. If all three variables were negative, most patients were discharged from ED, and the incidence of the clinical endpoint was 0%. The validation cohort confirmed the safety of discharge using these variables and revealed an incidence of the clinical endpoint from 14.3% in patients with CV disease, 9.4% in patients with dyspnoea and 18.2% in patients with O2 satuaration below 95%.ConclusionsBased on easily available variables like dyspnoea, oxygen saturation, history of CV disease, approximately 25% of patients subsequently confirmed with COVID-19 can be identified for safe discharge.Trial registration numberDRKS00023117.

Dataset Information

Economic outcome of cardiac CT-based evaluation and standard of care for suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department: a decision analytic model.

Rationale and objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Economic outcome of cardiac CT-based evaluation and standard of care for suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department: a decision analytic model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets