European journal of heart failure · 2024
Cost-effectiveness of remote haemodynamic monitoring by an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring sensor (CardioMEMS-HF system) in chronic heart failure in the Netherlands.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mokri Hamraz, Clephas Pascal R D, de Boer Rudolf A, van Baal Pieter, Brugts Jasper J, Rutten-van Mölken Maureen P M H
Аннотация
AIMS: Remote haemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor has been shown to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and improve quality of life. Cost-effectiveness analyses studying the value of remote haemodynamic monitoring in a European healthcare system with a contemporary standard care group are lacking.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PA-guided therapy compared to the standard of care based upon patient-level data of the MONITOR-HF trial performed in the Netherlands in patients with chronic HF (New York Heart Association class III and at least one previous HF hospitalization). Cost-effectiveness was measured as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the Dutch societal perspective with a lifetime horizon which encompasses a wide variety of costs including costs of hospitalizations, monitoring time, telephone contacts, laboratory assessments, and drug changes in both treatment groups. In the base-case analysis, PA-guided therapy increased costs compared to standard of care by €12 121. The QALYs per patient for PA-guided therapy and standard of care was 4.07 and 3.481, respectively, reflecting a gain of 0.58 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €20 753 per QALY, which is below the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY gained for HF.
CONCLUSIONS: The current cost-effectiveness study suggests that remote haemodynamic monitoring with PA-guided therapy on top of standard care is likely to be cost-effective for patients with symptomatic moderate-to-severe HF in the Netherlands.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PA-guided therapy compared to the standard of care based upon patient-level data of the MONITOR-HF trial performed in the Netherlands in patients with chronic HF (New York Heart Association class III and at least one previous HF hospitalization). Cost-effectiveness was measured as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the Dutch societal perspective with a lifetime horizon which encompasses a wide variety of costs including costs of hospitalizations, monitoring time, telephone contacts, laboratory assessments, and drug changes in both treatment groups. In the base-case analysis, PA-guided therapy increased costs compared to standard of care by €12 121. The QALYs per patient for PA-guided therapy and standard of care was 4.07 and 3.481, respectively, reflecting a gain of 0.58 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €20 753 per QALY, which is below the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY gained for HF.
CONCLUSIONS: The current cost-effectiveness study suggests that remote haemodynamic monitoring with PA-guided therapy on top of standard care is likely to be cost-effective for patients with symptomatic moderate-to-severe HF in the Netherlands.