Cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of coronary heart disease: an economic evaluation using data from the CE-MARC study

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_E90245E61121
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Title
Cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of coronary heart disease: an economic evaluation using data from the CE-MARC study
Journal
Heart
Author(s)
Walker S., Girardin F., McKenna C., Ball S. G., Nixon J., Plein S., Greenwood J. P., Sculpher M.
ISSN
1468-201X (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1355-6037
Publication state
Published
Issued date
06/2013
Volume
99
Number
12
Pages
873-81
Language
english
Notes
Walker, Simon
Girardin, Francois
McKenna, Claire
Ball, Stephen G
Nixon, Jane
Plein, Sven
Greenwood, John P
Sculpher, Mark
eng
RG/05/004/18607/BHF_/British Heart Foundation/United Kingdom
RG/05/004/BHF_/British Heart Foundation/United Kingdom
Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
England
Heart. 2013 Jun;99(12):873-81. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-303624. Epub 2013 Apr 16.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for coronary heart disease (CHD) derived from the CE-MARC study. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision analytic model to compare eight strategies for the diagnosis of CHD. SETTING: Secondary care out-patients (Cardiology Department). PATIENTS: Patients referred to cardiologists for the further evaluation of symptoms thought to be angina pectoris. INTERVENTIONS: Eight different strategies were considered, including different combinations of exercise treadmill testing (ETT), single-photon emission CT (SPECT), cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and coronary angiography (CA). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs expressed as UK sterling in 2010-2011 prices and health outcomes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The time horizon was 50 years. RESULTS: Based on the characteristics of patients in the CE-MARC study, only two strategies appear potentially cost-effective for diagnosis of CHD, both including CMR. The choice is between two strategies: one in which CMR follows a positive or inconclusive ETT, followed by CA if CMR is positive or inconclusive (Strategy 3 in the model); and the other where CMR is followed by CA if CMR is positive or inconclusive (Strategy 5 in the model). The more cost-effective of these two rests on the threshold cost per QALY gained below which health systems define an intervention as cost-effective. Strategy 3 appears cost-effective at the lower end of the threshold range used in the UK ( pound20 000 per QALY gained), while Strategy 5 appears cost-effective at the higher end of the threshold range ( pound30 000 per QALY). The results are robust to various sources of uncertainty although prior likelihood of CHD requiring revascularisation and the rate at which false negative patients are eventually appropriately identified do impact upon the results. CONCLUSIONS: The CE-MARC study showed that CMR had superior diagnostic accuracy to SPECT and concluded that CMR should be more widely used in the investigation of patients with CHD. The economic evaluation results show that using CMR is also a cost-effective strategy and supports the wider adoption of this modality.
Keywords
Coronary Disease/*diagnosis/economics, Cost-Benefit Analysis, *Decision Support Techniques, Female, Hospital Costs/*trends, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cine/*economics, Male, Middle Aged, *Models, Economic, United Kingdom, Imaging And Diagnostics
Pubmed
Create date
10/02/2021 12:32
Last modification date
11/02/2021 7:26
Usage data