Dataset Information

Evaluating the effects of variation in clinical practice: a risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis of acute stroke services.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Methods for the cost-effectiveness analysis of health technologies are now well established, but such methods may also have a useful role in the context of evaluating the effects of variation in applied clinical practice. This study illustrates a general methodology for the comparative analysis of applied clinical practice at alternative institutions--risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis--with an application that compares acute hospital services for stroke patients admitted to the main public hospitals in South Australia.

Methods

Using linked, routinely collected data on all South Australian hospital separations from July 2001 to June 2008, an analysis of the RAC-E of services provided at four metropolitan hospitals was undertaken using a decision analytic framework. Observed (plus extrapolated) and expected lifetime costs and survival were compared across patient populations, from which the relative cost-effectiveness of services provided at the different hospitals was estimated.

Results

Unadjusted results showed that at one hospital patients incurred fewer costs and gained more life years than at the other hospitals (i.e. it was the dominant hospital). After risk adjustment, the cost minimizing hospital incurred the lowest costs, but with fewer life-years gained than one other hospital. The mean incremental cost per life-year gained of services provided at the most effective hospital was under $20,000, with an associated 65% probability of being cost-effective at a $50,000 per life year monetary threshold.

Conclusions

RAC-E analyses can be used to identify important variation in the costs and outcomes associated with clinical practice at alternative institutions. Such data provides an impetus for further investigation to identify specific areas of variation, which may then inform the dissemination of best practice service delivery and organisation.

SUBMITTER: Pham C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3526450 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the effects of variation in clinical practice: a risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis of acute stroke services.

Pham Clarabelle C Caffrey Orla O Ben-Tovim David D Hakendorf Paul P Crotty Maria M Karnon Jonathan J

BMC health services research 20120821

<h4>Background</h4>Methods for the cost-effectiveness analysis of health technologies are now well established, but such methods may also have a useful role in the context of evaluating the effects of variation in applied clinical practice. This study illustrates a general methodology for the comparative analysis of applied clinical practice at alternative institutions--risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis--with an application that compares acute hospital services for stroke patient ...[more]

PMID: 22905669

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Statins are effective in the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline expands recommended statin use, but its cost-effectiveness has not been compared with other guidelines. METHODS:We used the Cardiovascular Disease Policy Model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the ACC/AHA guideline relative to current use, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines, and universal statin use in all men 45 to 74 years of age and women 55 to 74 years of age over a 10-year horizon from 2016 to 2025. Sensitivity analyses varied costs, risks, and benefits. Main outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and numbers needed to treat for 10 years per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS:Each approach produces substantial benefits and net cost savings relative to the status quo. Full adherence to the Adult Treatment Panel III guideline would result in 8.8 million more statin users than the status quo, at a number needed to treat for 10 years per quality-adjusted life-year gained of 35. The ACC/AHA guideline would potentially result in up to 12.3 million more statin users than the Adult Treatment Panel III guideline, with a marginal number needed to treat for 10 years per quality-adjusted life-year gained of 68. Moderate-intensity statin use in all men 45 to 74 years of age and women 55 to 74 years of age would result in 28.9 million more statin users than the ACC/AHA guideline, with a marginal number needed to treat for 10 years per quality-adjusted life-year gained of 108. In all cases, benefits would be greater in men than women. Results vary moderately with different risk thresholds for instituting statins and statin toxicity estimates but depend greatly on the disutility caused by daily medication use (pill burden). CONCLUSIONS:At a population level, the ACC/AHA guideline for expanded statin use for primary prevention is projected to treat more people, to save more lives, and to cost less compared with Adult Treatment Panel III in both men and women. Whether individuals benefit from long-term statin use for primary prevention depends more on the disutility associated with pill burden than their degree of cardiovascular risk.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the effects of variation in clinical practice: a risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis of acute stroke services.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluating the effects of variation in clinical practice: a risk adjusted cost-effectiveness (RAC-E) analysis of acute stroke services.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure