Costs of revascularization over eight years in the randomized and eligible patients in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST)

The Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST) was a randomized trial that compared, by intention to treat, the clinical outcome and costs of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery disease. We present the findings of the economic analysis of EAST through 8 years of follow-up and compare the cost and outcomes of patients randomized in EAST versus patients eligible but not randomized (registry patients). Charges were assessed from hospital UB82 and UB92 bills and professional charges from the Emory Clinic. Hospital charges were reduced to cost through step-down accounting methods. All costs and charges were inflated to 1997 dollars. Costs were assessed for initial hospitalization and for cumulative costs of the initial hospitalization and additional revascularization procedures up to 8 years. Total 8-year costs were $46,548 for CABG and $44,491 for PTCA (p = 0.37). Cost of CABG in the eligible registry group showed a pattern similar to that for randomized patients, but total cost of PTCA was lower for registry patients than for randomized patients. Thus, the primary procedural costs of CABG are more than those for PTCA; this cost advantage, given the limits of measurement, is largely or even completely lost for randomized patients over the course of 8 years because of additional procedures after a first revascularization by PTCA.

Targeting patients undergoing angioplasty for thrombus inhibition: a cost-effectiveness and decision support model

BACKGROUND

In recent clinical trials, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockers have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing adverse events after angioplasty in high-risk patients. However, uncertainty exists regarding the cost-effective selection of patients to receive antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All 4962 patients at Emory University Hospitals who underwent coronary intervention procedures (n=6062) from 1993 to 1995 were studied. Multivariate models to predict death and the composite of death, Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, and emergency additional revascularization were developed. Hospital costs and professional costs were determined. A cost-effectiveness analysis with therapy targeted to high-risk patients was performed. If patients with a >5% probability of events received antiplatelet therapy that reduced events by 24% and cost $1000, 40.1% of patients would receive therapy; complications would be reduced from 6.39% to 5.37%, and cost would increase $261 from $10343 to $10604, or $25504 per event prevented. The marginal cost per event prevented by moving from a 7% to a 5% probability of an event cutoff would be $57 799.

CONCLUSIONS

For high-risk patients, there may be cost savings; for low-risk patients, therapy may not be cost effective; and for patients in the midrange (between 5% and 7% probability of an adverse event), events may be prevented at an acceptable level of cost.

Economic impact of GPIIB/IIIA blockade after high-risk angioplasty: results from the RESTORE trial. Randomized Efficacy Study of Tirofiban for Outcomes and Restenosis

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to assess the impact of GPIIb/IIIa blockade with tirofiban on costs during the initial hospitalization and at 30 days among patients undergoing high-risk coronary angioplasty.

BACKGROUND

GPIIb/IIIa blockers are a new class of compounds that have been shown in clinical studies to prevent complications after high-risk angioplasty.

METHODS

The RESTORE trial was a multinational, blinded placebo-controlled study of 2,197 patients randomized to tirofiban or placebo following coronary angioplasty. This economic assessment was a prospective substudy of the RESTORE trial, and included 1,920 patients enrolled in the U.S. Costs were estimated for the U.S. cohort based on their utilization of healthcare resources and on costs measured directly in 820 U.S. patients at 30 sites.

RESULTS

There was a 36% difference in the rate of the composite event of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and revascularization at two days between tirofiban and placebo (8% vs. 12%, p = 0.002). This difference was attributed to a reduction in nonfatal MI, repeat angioplasty, coronary surgery and stent placement. These clinical benefits followed a similar trend at 30 days, with a 16% reduction in the composite event (p = 0.10). In-hospital cost, including professional and study drug costs, was $12,145 +/- 5,882 with placebo versus $12,230 +/- 5,527 with tirofiban (p = 0.75). The 30-day cost was $12,402 +/- 6,147 with placebo versus $12,446 +/- 5,814 with tirofiban (p = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Tirofiban has been shown to decrease in-hospital and possibly 30-day events after high-risk angioplasty. The beneficial clinical effects of tirofiban in high-risk patients can be achieved at no increased cost.

Can cardiovascular clinical characteristics be identified and outcome models be developed from an in-patient claims database?

The objective of this study was to assess whether administrative (claims) databases can be used to assess clinical variables and predict outcome. Although administrative databases are useful for assessing resource utilization, their utility for assessing clinical information is less certain. Prospectively gathered clinical databases, however, are expensive and not widely available. The UB92 formulation of the hospital bill was used as an administrative source of data and compared with the clinical cardiovascular database at Emory University. The claims database was compared with the clinical database for 11 variables. Outcome models were developed with multivariate methods. A total of 11,883 patients who underwent catheterization (5,255 underwent percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA] and 3,794 underwent coronary artery bypass surgery [CABG]) between 1991 and 1995 were included. For some variables, the claims database correlated well (diabetes, sensitivity 87%, specificity 99%), whereas for others the claims database was less accurate (peripheral vascular disease, sensitivity 20%, specificity 99%). Uncertain coding in the claims database, which can result in the same code being used for co-morbid states and severity of disease, as well as complications, limited the ability of claims to predict outcome. Clinical databases may also be limited by lack of objectivity and missing data. The utility of claims databases to assess severity of disease and co-morbid states is limited, and outcome modeling and risk assessment from claims databases may be inappropriate and spurious. Developing better data standards and less expensive methods for acquisition of clinical data is necessary for improved outcome assessment.

Cost of extracorporeal life support in pediatric patients with acute respiratory failure

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) on mortality in pediatric patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) at our institution; and to calculate the hospital charges associated with the use of ECLS.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of medical records and hospital charges.

SETTING

Pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) of a university-affiliated children's hospital.

PATIENTS

Twenty patients admitted to the pediatric ICU between 1991 and 1995 for AHRF who received ECLS as a part of their hospital course.

INTERVENTIONS

Predicted mortality was calculated using the Pediatric Respiratory Failure score and was compared with survival at the time of hospital discharge. Hospital charges were used as a proxy for resource utilization. Cost-per-life-year-saved calculations were performed based on a normal life expectancy for survivors.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Twenty patients were identified. The median age was 4.83 yrs. The median duration of ECLS was 9 days, with 19.5 days in the pediatric ICU and 23.5 days for the entire hospital length of stay. The observed mortality rate for these patients was 20%. Median predicted mortality rate based on the Pediatric Respiratory Failure score calculation was 83%. The hospital charges incurred by these patients was a median of $199,096. Based on a normal life expectancy for survivors, this results in a cost of $4,190/life-year.

CONCLUSIONS

ECLS for the pediatric patient with AHRF is done at a considerable cost. However, ECLS affects survival favorably, and compares favorably when considering cost/life-year calculations. The data presented in this study may serve as a benchmark for comparison with newer therapies (i.e., liquid ventilation, nitric oxide). These data also provide a framework for cost-based analyses at other ECLS institutions.

Primary care physicians and avoidable hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

The rate of admission for avoidable hospital conditions (AHCs) has been proposed as a measure of the ability of a population to access health care. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the availability of primary care physicians and the rate of avoidable hospitalizations.

METHODS

Statewide hospital discharge data for general acute care hospitals in Pennsylvania were used to determine age- and sex-adjusted AHC rates in the 26 health service areas (HSAs) in Pennsylvania. The number and type of primary care physician as well as the per capita income for each HSA were obtained from the Area Resource File. Correlations of number and type of physician with AHC rates were obtained.

RESULTS

Only the number of family and general practice physicians (FPs/GPs) per population was significantly correlated with adult and pediatric AHC rates. As the number of FPs/GPs in each HSA increased, the AHC rate decreased. The significant relationship between FPs/GPs and the AHC rate remained after controlling for the effect of per capita income. No significant correlation was found between either the number of general internists and the adult AHC rate or the number of general pediatricians and the pediatric AHC rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of FPs/GPs is related to lower rates of hospitalization for certain conditions. Family physicians may provide more effective first-contact access to health care than is provided by either general internists or pediatricians in Pennsylvania. Future studies should address whether care by family physicians is more cost-effective as a result of this reduction in avoidable hospitalizations.