Dataset Information

Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment (SWIFT): Cost-Effectiveness of a Stroke Preparedness Intervention.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Less than 25% of stroke patients arrive to an emergency department within the 3-hour treatment window. OBJECTIVE:We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a stroke preparedness behavioral intervention study (Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment [SWIFT]), a stroke intervention demonstrating capacity to decrease race-ethnic disparities in ED arrival times. METHODS:Using the literature and SWIFT outcomes for 2 interventions, enhanced educational (EE) materials, and interactive intervention (II), we assess the cost-effectiveness of SWIFT in 2 ways: (1) Markov model, and (2) cost-to-outcome ratio. The Markov model primary outcome was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using the cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000/QALY. The primary cost-to-outcome endpoint was cost per additional patient with ED arrival <3 hours, stroke knowledge, and preparedness capacity. We assessed the ICER of II and EE versus standard care (SC) from a health sector and societal perspective using 2015 USD, a time horizon of 5 years, and a discount rate of 3%. RESULTS:The cost-effectiveness of the II and EE programs was, respectively, $227.35 and $74.63 per additional arrival <3 hours, $440.72 and $334.09 per additional person with stroke knowledge proficiency, and $655.70 and $811.77 per additional person with preparedness capacity. Using a societal perspective, the ICER for EE versus SC was $84 643 per QALY gained and the ICER for II versus EE was $59 058 per QALY gained. Incorporating fixed costs, EE and II would need to administered to 507 and 1693 or more patients, respectively, to achieve an ICER of $100 000/QALY. CONCLUSION:II was a cost-effective strategy compared with both EE and SC. Nevertheless, high initial fixed costs associated with II may limit its cost-effectiveness in settings with smaller patient populations.

SUBMITTER: Stevens ER

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6857539 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment (SWIFT): Cost-Effectiveness of a Stroke Preparedness Intervention.

Stevens Elizabeth R ER Roberts Eric E Kuczynski Heather Carman HC Boden-Albala Bernadette B

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 20190727 11

<h4>Background</h4>Less than 25% of stroke patients arrive to an emergency department within the 3-hour treatment window.<h4>Objective</h4>We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a stroke preparedness behavioral intervention study (Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment [SWIFT]), a stroke intervention demonstrating capacity to decrease race-ethnic disparities in ED arrival times.<h4>Methods</h4>Using the literature and SWIFT outcomes for 2 interventions, enhanced educational (EE) materia ...[more]

PMID: 31708060

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background We evaluated a community-engaged stroke preparedness intervention that aimed to increase early hospital arrival and emergency medical services (EMS) utilization among patients with stroke in the South Side of Chicago, Illinois. Methods and Results We compared change in early hospital arrival (<3 hours from symptom onset) and EMS utilization before and after our intervention among patients with confirmed ischemic stroke at an intervention hospital on the South Side of Chicago with concurrent data from 6 hospitals in nonintervention communities on the North Side of Chicago and 17 hospitals in St Louis, Missouri. We assessed EMS utilization for suspected stroke secondarily, using geospatial information systems analysis of Chicago ambulance transports before and after our intervention. Among 21 497 patients with confirmed ischemic stroke across all sites, early arrival rates at the intervention hospital increased by 0.5% per month (95% CI, -0.2% to 1.2%) after intervention compared with the preintervention period but were not different from North Side Chicago hospitals (difference of -0.3% per month [95% CI, -0.12% to 0.06%]) or St Louis hospitals (difference of 0.7% per month [95% CI, -0.1% to 1.4%]). EMS utilization at the intervention hospital decreased by 0.8% per month (95% CI, -1.7% to 0.2%) but was not different from North Side Chicago hospitals (difference of 0.004% per month [95% CI, -1.1% to 1.1%]) or St Louis hospitals (difference of -0.7% per month [95% CI, -1.7% to 0.3%]). EMS utilization for suspected stroke increased in the areas surrounding the intervention hospital (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6) and in the South Side (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), but not in the North Side (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.9-1.1). Conclusions Following a community stroke preparedness intervention, early hospital arrival and EMS utilization for confirmed ischemic stroke did not increase. However, ambulance transports for suspected stroke increased in the intervention community compared with other regions. Registration URL: https://www.clini?caltr?ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02301299.

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:Medication errors are common in primary care and are associated with considerable risk of patient harm. We tested whether a pharmacist-led, information technology-based intervention was more effective than simple feedback in reducing the number of patients at risk of measures related to hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring of medicines 6 months after the intervention.In this pragmatic, cluster randomised trial general practices in the UK were stratified by research site and list size, and randomly assigned by a web-based randomisation service in block sizes of two or four to one of two groups. The practices were allocated to either computer-generated simple feedback for at-risk patients (control) or a pharmacist-led information technology intervention (PINCER), composed of feedback, educational outreach, and dedicated support. The allocation was masked to researchers and statisticians involved in processing and analysing the data. The allocation was not masked to general practices, pharmacists, patients, or researchers who visited practices to extract data. [corrected]. Primary outcomes were the proportions of patients at 6 months after the intervention who had had any of three clinically important errors: non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prescribed to those with a history of peptic ulcer without co-prescription of a proton-pump inhibitor; ? blockers prescribed to those with a history of asthma; long-term prescription of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or loop diuretics to those 75 years or older without assessment of urea and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. The cost per error avoided was estimated by incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. This study is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN21785299.72 general practices with a combined list size of 480,942 patients were randomised. At 6 months' follow-up, patients in the PINCER group were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID if they had a history of peptic ulcer without gastroprotection (OR 0·58, 95% CI 0·38-0·89); a ? blocker if they had asthma (0·73, 0·58-0·91); or an ACE inhibitor or loop diuretic without appropriate monitoring (0·51, 0·34-0·78). PINCER has a 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker's ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 per error avoided at 6 months.The PINCER intervention is an effective method for reducing a range of medication errors in general practices with computerised clinical records.Patient Safety Research Portfolio, Department of Health, England.

Dataset Information

Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment (SWIFT): Cost-Effectiveness of a Stroke Preparedness Intervention.

Publications

Stroke Warning Information and Faster Treatment (SWIFT): Cost-Effectiveness of a Stroke Preparedness Intervention.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets