Cost-effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

Mark A Hlatky, Gillian D Sanders, Douglas K Owens
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator.","authors":"Mark A Hlatky,&nbsp;Gillian D Sanders,&nbsp;Douglas K Owens","doi":"10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023153.81976.3a","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many clinicians and policymakers are concerned whether use of the implantable defibrillator (ICD) is justified in view of its high cost. Three randomized trials of the ICD have reported economic outcomes. Each trial found a large difference in cost between patients assigned to an ICD versus patients assigned to conventional therapy that persisted over three to six years of follow-up. Each trial also found better survival among ICD patients, and calculated ICD cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios between 27,000 dollars per life year added and 139,000 dollars per life year added. The variability in the cost-effectiveness ratios among trials is mainly due to variability in the years of life added by the ICD among the trials and, by extension, among patient subgroups. A rough rule of thumb is that the ICD will be economically attractive when it prolongs mean survival by six months or more, which is attainable in higher risk patient subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":80888,"journal":{"name":"Cardiac electrophysiology review","volume":"7 4","pages":"479-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023153.81976.3a","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiac electrophysiology review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023153.81976.3a","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Many clinicians and policymakers are concerned whether use of the implantable defibrillator (ICD) is justified in view of its high cost. Three randomized trials of the ICD have reported economic outcomes. Each trial found a large difference in cost between patients assigned to an ICD versus patients assigned to conventional therapy that persisted over three to six years of follow-up. Each trial also found better survival among ICD patients, and calculated ICD cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios between 27,000 dollars per life year added and 139,000 dollars per life year added. The variability in the cost-effectiveness ratios among trials is mainly due to variability in the years of life added by the ICD among the trials and, by extension, among patient subgroups. A rough rule of thumb is that the ICD will be economically attractive when it prolongs mean survival by six months or more, which is attainable in higher risk patient subgroups.

植入式心律转复除颤器的成本效益。
鉴于植入式除颤器(ICD)的高成本,许多临床医生和政策制定者担心其使用是否合理。ICD的三个随机试验报告了经济结果。每项试验都发现,接受ICD治疗的患者与接受常规治疗的患者之间的成本差异很大,随访时间长达3至6年。每项试验还发现ICD患者的生存率更高,并计算出ICD成本效益(CE)比率在每生命年增加2.7万美元到每生命年增加13.9万美元之间。试验之间成本-效果比的差异主要是由于ICD增加的寿命年数在试验之间的差异,进而在患者亚组之间的差异。一个粗略的经验法则是,如果ICD能将平均生存期延长6个月或更长时间,这在高风险患者亚组中是可以实现的,那么它在经济上是有吸引力的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信