Cost-Effectiveness of Extended and One-Time Screening Versus No Screening for Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation in the USA

Health Economic Research Assessing the Value of Early Detection of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most prominent cause of death worldwide and has a major impact on healthcare budgets. While early detection strategies may reduce the overall CVD burden through earlier treatment, it is unclear which strategies are (most) efficient.

AIM

This systematic review reports on the cost effectiveness of recent early detection strategies for CVD in adult populations at risk.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were searched to identify scientific articles published between January 2016 and May 2022. The first reviewer screened all articles, a second reviewer independently assessed a random 10% sample of the articles for validation. Discrepancies were solved through discussion, involving a third reviewer if necessary. All costs were converted to 2021 euros. Reporting quality of all studies was assessed using the CHEERS 2022 checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 49 out of 5552 articles were included for data extraction and assessment of reporting quality, reporting on 48 unique early detection strategies. Early detection of atrial fibrillation in asymptomatic patients was most frequently studied (n = 15) followed by abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 8), hypertension (n = 7) and predicted 10-year CVD risk (n = 5). Overall, 43 strategies (87.8%) were reported as cost effective and 11 (22.5%) CVD-related strategies reported cost reductions. Reporting quality ranged between 25 and 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that early CVD detection strategies are predominantly cost effective and may reduce CVD-related costs compared with no early detection. However, the lack of standardisation complicates the comparison of cost-effectiveness outcomes between studies. Real-world cost effectiveness of early CVD detection strategies will depend on the target country and local context.

REGISTRATION OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

CRD42022321585 in International Prospective Registry of Ongoing Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) submitted at 10 May 2022.

Cost-Effectiveness of Screening to Identify Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is recommended for people aged above 65 years. Screening for AF in asymptomatic individuals can be beneficial by enabling earlier diagnosis and the commencement of interventions to reduce the risk of early events, thus improving patient outcomes. This study systematically reviews the literature about the cost-effectiveness of various screening methods for previously undiagnosed AF.

METHODS

Four databases were searched to identify articles that are cost-effectiveness studies conducted on screening for AF published from January 2000 to August 2022. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 checklist was used to assess the quality of the selected studies. A previously published approach was used to assess the usefulness of each study for health policy makers.

RESULTS

The database search yielded 799 results, with 26 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Articles were categorised into four subgroups: (i) population screening, (ii) opportunistic screening, (iii) targeted, and (iv) mixed methods of screening. Most of the studies screened adults ≥65 years of age. Most studies were performed from a 'health care payer perspective' and almost all studies used 'not screening' as a comparator. Almost all screening methods assessed were found to be cost-effective in comparison to 'not screening'. The reporting quality varied between 58% to 89%. The majority of the studies were found to be of limited usefulness for health policy makers, as none of the studies made any clear statements about policy change or implementation direction.

CONCLUSION

All approaches of AF screening were found to be cost-effective compared with no screening, while opportunistic screening was found to be the optimal approach in some studies. However, screening for AF in asymptomatic individuals is context specific and likely to be cost-effective depending on the population screened, screening approach, frequency, and the duration of screening.

Cost-Effectiveness of Atrial Fibrillation Screening Strategies: A Systematic Review

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia. AF is associated with an increased risk of stroke. We aimed to review systematically the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for patients with AF.

Methods

To find related research and articles, articles published in Iranian and international databases by using a combination of MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and based on inclusion and exclusion criteria were searched and reviewed until Dec 2020. The main outcome measures of the final articles were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per gained or additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), additional case detected, and avoided stroke.

Results

Out of 3,360 studies found, finally, fifteen studies were included in the research. The lowest ICER numerical value was 78.39 for AF screening using ECG for 65-85 yr old Japanese women. The highest value of this index is equal to 70864.31 for performing ECG monitoring for more than 60 d for Canadians over 80 yr without AF history. In two studies, the results were expressed with the years of life gained (YLG measure. Of course, in one study, the results were not reported with this measure, and in one study, the results were reported with ICER.

Conclusion

Most of the studies acknowledged the cost-effectiveness of different AF screening strategies. However, studies that confirmed the cost-effectiveness of population-based screening were more than studies that confirmed the cost-effectiveness of other screening strategies.

Cost-effectiveness of atrial fibrillation screening in Canadian community practice

Background

Contemporary guidelines recommend opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation (AF).

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of single time point opportunistic AF screening for patients 65 years and older by using the single-lead electrocardiogram.

Methods

An established Markov cohort model was adapted by updating the background mortality estimates, epidemiology, screening efficacy, treatment patterns, resource use, and cost inputs to reflect a Canadian health care setting. Inputs were derived from a contemporary prospective screening study performed in Canadian primary care settings (screening efficacy and epidemiology) and the published literature (unit costs, epidemiology, mortality, utility, and treatment efficacy). The impact of screening and oral anticoagulant treatment on the cost and clinical outcomes was analyzed. A Canadian payer perspective over lifetime was used for analysis, with costs expressed in 2019 Canadian dollars.

Results

Among the estimated screening-eligible population of 2,929,301 patients, the screening cohort identified an additional 127,670 AF cases compared with the usual care cohort. The model estimated avoidance of 12,236 strokes and incremental quality-adjusted life-years of 59,577 (0.02 per patient) over lifetime in the screening cohort. Cost savings were substantial because of improved health outcomes, reflecting screening being the dominant strategy (affordable and effective). Model results were robust across sensitivity and scenario analyses.

Conclusion

Single time point opportunistic screening of AF using a single-lead electrocardiogram device in Canadian patients 65 years and older without known AF may provide improved health outcomes with cost savings from the perspective of a single payer health care environment.

Cost-effectiveness of targeted screening for non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the United Kingdom in older patients using digital approaches

AIM

Screening for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is key in identifying patients with undiagnosed disease who may be eligible for anticoagulation therapy. Understanding the economic value of screening is necessary to assess optimal strategies for payers and healthcare systems. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of opportunistic screening with handheld digital devices and pulse palpation, as well as targeted screening predictive algorithms for UK patients ≥75 years of age.

METHODS

A previously developed Markov cohort model was adapted to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes of opportunistic screening including pulse palpation, Zenicor (extended 14 days), KardiaMobile (extended), and two algorithms compared to no screening. Key model inputs including epidemiology estimates, screening effectiveness, and risks for medical events were derived from the STROKESTOP, ARISTOTLE studies, and published literature, and cost inputs were obtained from a UK national cost database. Health and cost outcomes, annually discounted at 3.5%, were reported for a cohort of 10,000 patients vs. no screening over a time horizon equivalent to a patient's lifetime, Analyses were performed from a UK National Health Services and personal social services perspective.

RESULTS

Zenicor, pulse palpation, and KardiaMobile were dominant (providing better health outcomes at lower costs) vs. no screening; both algorithms were cost-effective vs. no screening, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of £1,040 and £1,166. Zenicor, pulse palpation, and KardiaMobile remained dominant options vs. no screening in all scenarios explored. Deterministic sensitivity analyses indicated long-term stroke care costs, prevalence of undiagnosed NVAF in patients 75-79 years of age, and clinical efficacy of anticoagulant on stroke prevention were the main drivers of the cost-effectiveness results.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for NVAF at ≥75 years of age could result in fewer NVAF-related strokes. NVAF screening is cost-effective and may be cost-saving depending on the program chosen.

Cost-effectiveness of population screening for atrial fibrillation: the STROKESTOP study

AIMS

Previous studies on the cost-effectiveness of screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) are based on assumptions of long-term clinical effects. The STROKESTOP study, which randomised 27 975 persons aged 75/76 years into a screening invitation group and a control group, has a median follow-up time of 6.9 years. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of population-based screening for AF using clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The analysis is based on a Markov cohort model. The prevalence of AF, the use of oral anticoagulation, clinical event data, and all-cause mortality were taken from the STROKESTOP study. The cost for clinical events, age-specific utilities, utility decrement due to stroke, and stroke death was taken from the literature. Uncertainty in the model was considered in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Per 1000 individuals invited to the screening, there were 77 gained life years and 65 gained quality-adjusted life years. The incremental cost was €1.77 million lower in the screening invitation group. Gained quality-adjusted life years to a lower cost means that the screening strategy was dominant. The result from 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations showed that the AF screening strategy was cost-effective in 99.2% and cost-saving in 92.7% of the simulations. In the base-case scenario, screening of 1000 individuals resulted in 10.6 [95% confidence interval (CI): -22.5 to 1.4] fewer strokes (8.4 ischaemic and 2.2 haemorrhagic strokes), 1.0 (95% CI: -1.9 to 4.1) more cases of systemic embolism, and 2.9 (95% CI: -18.2 to 13.1) fewer bleedings associated with hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Based on the STROKESTOP study, this analysis shows that a broad AF screening strategy in an elderly population is cost-effective. Efforts should be made to increase screening participation.

Cost-effectiveness of Screening for Atrial Fibrillation Using Wearable Devices

Question

Is population-based atrial fibrillation (AF) screening using wearable devices cost-effective?

Findings

In this economic evaluation of 30 million simulated individuals with an age, sex, and comorbidity profile matching the US population aged 65 years or older, AF screening using wearable devices was cost-effective, with the overall preferred strategy identified as wearable photoplethysmography, followed conditionally by wearable electrocardiography with patch monitor confirmation (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $57 894 per quality-adjusted life-year). The cost-effectiveness of screening was consistent across multiple scenarios, including strata of sex, screening at earlier ages, and with variation in the association of anticoagulation with risk of stroke associated with screening-detected AF.

Meaning

This study suggests that contemporary AF screening using wearable devices may be cost-effective.

Importance

Undiagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important cause of stroke. Screening for AF using wrist-worn wearable devices may prevent strokes, but their cost-effectiveness is unknown.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of contemporary AF screening strategies, particularly wrist-worn wearable devices.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation used a microsimulation decision-analytic model and was conducted from September 8, 2020, to May 23, 2022, comprising 30 million simulated individuals with an age, sex, and comorbidity profile matching the US population aged 65 years or older.

Interventions

Eight AF screening strategies, with 6 using wrist-worn wearable devices (watch or band photoplethysmography, with or without watch or band electrocardiography) and 2 using traditional modalities (ie, pulse palpation and 12-lead electrocardiogram) vs no screening.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, defined as US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Secondary measures included rates of stroke and major bleeding.

Results

In the base case analysis of this model, the mean (SD) age was 72.5 (7.5) years, and 50% of the individuals were women. All 6 screening strategies using wrist-worn wearable devices were estimated to be more effective than no screening (range of QALYs gained vs no screening, 226-957 per 100 000 individuals) and were associated with greater relative benefit than screening using traditional modalities (range of QALYs gained vs no screening, −116 to 93 per 100 000 individuals). Compared with no screening, screening using wrist-worn wearable devices was associated with a reduction in stroke incidence by 20 to 23 per 100 000 person-years but an increase in major bleeding by 20 to 44 per 100 000 person-years. The overall preferred strategy was wearable photoplethysmography, followed conditionally by wearable electrocardiography with patch monitor confirmation, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $57 894 per QALY, meeting the acceptability threshold of $100 000 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness of screening was consistent across multiple scenarios, including strata of sex, screening at earlier ages (eg, ≥50 years), and with variation in the association of anticoagulation with risk of stroke in the setting of screening-detected AF.

Conclusions and Relevance

This economic evaluation of AF screening using a microsimulation decision-analytic model suggests that screening using wearable devices is cost-effective compared with either no screening or AF screening using traditional methods.

Cost-effectiveness of screening for atrial fibrillation in a single primary care center at a 3-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of intermittent electrocardiogram (ECG) screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) among 70-74-year old individuals in primary care. We also aimed to assess adherence to anticoagulants, severe bleeding, stroke and mortality among screening-detected AF cases at three-year follow-up.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis based on a cross-sectional screening study for AF among 70-74-year old patients, who were registered at a single primary care center, was followed for three years for mortality. Data about adherence to anticoagulants, incidence of stroke and severe bleeding among screening-detected AF cases, were collected from patient's records. Markov model and Monte Carlo simulation were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the screening program.

RESULTS

The mortality rate among screening-detected AF cases (n = 16) did not differ compared to the 274 individuals with no AF (hazard ratio 0.86, CI 0.12-6.44). Adherence to anticoagulants was 92%. There was no stroke or severe bleeding. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of screening versus no screening was EUR 2389/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The screening showed a 99% probability of being cost-effective compared to no screening at a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 20,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSION

Screening for AF among 70-74-year olds in primary care using intermittent ECG appears to be cost-effective at 3-year follow-up with high anticoagulants adherence and no increased mortality.

Comparative Clinical Effectiveness of Population-Based Atrial Fibrillation Screening Using Contemporary Modalities: A Decision-Analytic Model

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening is endorsed by certain guidelines for individuals aged ≥65 years. Yet many AF screening strategies exist, including the use of wrist-worn wearable devices, and their comparative effectiveness is not well-understood. Methods and Results We developed a decision-analytic model simulating 50 million individuals with an age, sex, and comorbidity profile matching the United States population aged ≥65 years (ie, with a guideline-based AF screening indication). We modeled no screening, in addition to 45 distinct AF screening strategies (comprising different modalities and screening intervals), each initiated at a clinical encounter. The primary effectiveness measure was quality-adjusted life-years, with incident stroke and major bleeding as secondary measures. We defined continuous or nearly continuous modalities as those capable of monitoring beyond a single time-point (eg, patch monitor), and discrete modalities as those capable of only instantaneous AF detection (eg, 12-lead ECG). In total, 10 AF screening strategies were effective compared with no screening (300-1500 quality-adjusted life-years gained/100 000 individuals screened). Nine (90%) effective strategies involved use of a continuous or nearly continuous modality such as patch monitor or wrist-worn wearable device, whereas 1 (10%) relied on discrete modalities alone. Effective strategies reduced stroke incidence (number needed to screen to prevent a stroke: 3087-4445) but increased major bleeding (number needed to screen to cause a major bleed: 1815-4049) and intracranial hemorrhage (number needed to screen to cause intracranial hemorrhage: 7693-16 950). The test specificity was a highly influential model parameter on screening effectiveness. Conclusions When modeled from a clinician-directed perspective, the comparative effectiveness of population-based AF screening varies substantially upon the specific strategy used. Future screening interventions and guidelines should consider the relative effectiveness of specific AF screening strategies.

The Cost-Effectiveness of One-Time Opportunistic Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in Different Age Cohorts of Inhabitants in Denmark Aged 65 Years and Above. A Markov Modelled Analysis

AIM

The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of one-time opportunistic screening for AF in general practice in citizens aged ≥65 years in Denmark compared to a no-screening alternative following current Danish practice.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A decision tree and a Markov model were designed to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in a hypothetical cohort of citizens aged ≥65 years equivalent to the Danish population (1 M citizens) over the course of 19 years, using a healthcare and societal perspective. Share of detected AF patients following opportunistic screening was retrieved from a recent Danish screening study, whereas the risk stroke and bleedings in AF patients were based on population data from national registries and their associated costs was obtained from published national registry studies.The present study showed that one-time opportunistic screening for AF was more costly, but also more effective compared to a no-screening alternative. The analysis predicts that one-time opportunistic screening of all Danes aged ≥65 years potentially can identify an additional 10,300 AF patients and prevent 856 strokes in the period considered. The incremental cost of such a screening program is €56.4 M, with a total gain of 6,000 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €9,400 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

Opportunistic screening in general practice in citizens aged ≥65 years in Denmark is cost-effective compared to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €22,000. The study and its findings support a potential implementation of opportunistic screening for AF at the general practitioner level in Denmark.