liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The cost-effectiveness of an early interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome based on the RITA 3 trial
Linköping University, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Health Technology Assessment. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK .
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK .
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK .
Show others and affiliations
2008 (English)In: Heart, ISSN 1355-6037, E-ISSN 1468-201X, Vol. 94, 717-723 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Evidence suggests that an early interventional strategy for patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) can improve health outcomes but also increase costs when compared with a conservative strategy.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of an early interventional strategy in different risk groups from a UK health-service perspective.

Design: Decision-analytic model based on randomised clinical trial data.

Main outcome measures: Costs in UK Sterling at 2003/2004 prices and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) combined into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Methods: Data from the third Randomised Intervention Trial of unstable Angina (RITA 3) was employed to estimate rates of cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction, costs and health-related quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was estimated over patients’ lifetimes within the decision-analytic model.

Results: The mean incremental cost per QALY gained for an early interventional strategy was approximately £55 000, £22 000 and £12 000 for patients at low, intermediate and high risk, respectively. The early interventional strategy is approximately 1%, 35% and 95% likely to be cost-effective for patients at low, intermediate and high risk, respectively, at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness of early intervention in low-risk patients is sensitive to assumptions about the duration of the treatment effect.

Conclusion: An early interventional strategy in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS is likely to be considered cost-effective for patients at high and intermediate risk, but this is less likely to be the case for patients at low risk.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 94, 717-723 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-14660DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2007.127340OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-14660DiVA: diva2:24159
Available from: 2007-09-24 Created: 2007-09-24 Last updated: 2017-12-13
In thesis
1. Cost-effectiveness and Value of Further Research of Treatment Strategies for Cardiovascular Disease
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Cost-effectiveness and Value of Further Research of Treatment Strategies for Cardiovascular Disease
2007 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Economic evaluations provide a tool to estimate costs and health consequences of competing medical technologies, ultimately to aid decision makers when deciding which medical technologies should be funded from available resources. Such decisions inevitably need to be taken under uncertainty and it is not clear how to approach them in health care decision-making. Recent work in economic evaluation has proposed an analytic framework where two related, but conceptually different decisions need to be considered: (1) should a medical technology be adopted given existing evidence; and (2) whether more evidence should be acquired to support the adoption decision in the future. The proposed analytic framework requires a decision-analytic model appropriately representing the clinical decision problem under consideration, a probabilistic analysis of this model in order to determine cost-effectiveness and characterise current decision uncertainty, and estimating the value of additional information from research to reduce decision uncertainty. The main aim of this thesis is to apply the analytic framework on three case studies concerning treatment strategies for cardiovascular disease in order to establish whether the treatment strategies should be adopted given current available information and if more information should be acquired to support the adoption decisions in the future. The implications for policy and methodology of utilising the analytic framework employed in the case studies are also discussed in this thesis.

The results of the case studies show that a screening programme for abdominal aortic aneurysm in 65-year-old men is likely to be cost-effective in a Swedish setting and there appears to be little value in performing further research regarding this decision problem; an early interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome is cost-effective for patients at intermediate to high risk of further cardiac events in a UK setting; endarterectomy in patients with an asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis is cost-effective for men around 73 years of age or younger in a Swedish setting and conducting further research regarding this decision problem is potentially worthwhile.

Comparing the results of the present analyses with current clinical practice shows a need for changing clinical practice in Sweden regarding screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm and endarterectomy in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Furthermore, employing the analytic framework applied in the case studies can improve treatment guidelines and recommendations for further research. In particular, treatment guidelines ought to consider in which particular subgroups of patients an intervention is cost-effective.

The case studies indicate that it is feasible to apply the analytic framework for economic evaluation of health care. Methodological development can improve the accuracy with which cost-effectiveness and value of information is estimated, but may also lead to comprehensive and complex evaluations. The nature of the decision problem should determine the level of comprehensiveness required for a particular evaluation.

Publisher
131 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1011
Keyword
Economic evaluation, decision-analytic modelling, prioritising research, carotid endarterectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm, screening, non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome, early intervention
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-9788 (URN)978-91-85831-20-3 (ISBN)
Public defence
2007-09-27, Berzeliussalen, Campus US, Linköpings universitet, Linköping, 13:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2007-09-24 Created: 2007-09-24 Last updated: 2009-08-22

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textLink to Ph.D. thesis

Authority records BETA

Henriksson, Martin

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Henriksson, Martin
By organisation
Health Technology AssessmentFaculty of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Heart
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 80 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf