Assessing the Cost and Resource Use Impact of Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Shocks in the UK CareLink Population.
cardiology
hospital costs
implantable devices
Journal
ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR
ISSN: 1178-6981
Titre abrégé: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101560564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
09
02
2023
accepted:
12
05
2023
medline:
12
6
2023
pubmed:
12
6
2023
entrez:
12
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
High voltage devices (implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators referred to jointly as ICDs) reduce rates of sudden cardiac death in patients with cardiovascular disease. However, shocks from ICDs may be associated with healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs. The aim of this study was to estimate the costs associated with both appropriate and inappropriate shocks from ICDs. Patients with appropriate and inappropriate shocks from ICDs were identified via CareLink data from Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital between March 2017 and March 2019. The devices were SmartShock activated, with anti-tachycardia pacing. Costs were estimated according to the dominant episode of healthcare, from an NHS payer perspective. There were 2445 patients on the CareLink system with ICDs. Over the two-year period, HCRU data from 143 shock episodes among 112 patients were reported. The total cost for all shocks was £252,552 with mean costs of £1608 and £2795 for appropriate and inappropriate shocks respectively. There was substantial variation in HCRU between shock episodes. While there was a low rate of inappropriate shocks from ICDs, there were still substantial HCRU and costs incurred. In this study, the specific HCRU was not costed independently, meaning the costs reported are likely to be a conservative estimate. Whilst every attempt to reduce shocks should be made, appropriate shocks cannot be avoided. Strategies to reduce the incidence of inappropriate and unnecessary shocks should be implemented to reduce overall health care costs associated with ICDs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37305155
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S403712
pii: 403712
pmc: PMC10257399
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
425-432Informations de copyright
© 2023 Llewellyn et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Erin Barker and Catherine Bowe are employees of YHEC, who received funding from Medtronic to write this manuscript. Natalie Hallas and Ralphael Oghagbon are employees of Medtronic. Archana Rao reports grants, personal fees from Medtronic, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2009;9(6):393-400
pubmed: 19929037
Heart Rhythm. 2015 May;12(5):926-36
pubmed: 25637563
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2014 Oct;37(10):1315-23
pubmed: 25139346
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2019 Jun 17;19(1):146
pubmed: 31208342
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 2;14(1):e0206611
pubmed: 30601808
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017 Feb;10(2):
pubmed: 28196927
Circulation. 2010 Dec 7;122(23):2359-67
pubmed: 21098452
J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Mar;97 Suppl 3:S108-14
pubmed: 24772587
Europace. 2016 Nov;18(11):1719-1725
pubmed: 27485577
Circulation. 2002 Feb 5;105(5):589-94
pubmed: 11827924
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jan 20;352(3):225-37
pubmed: 15659722
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2001 Mar;12(3):369-81
pubmed: 11291815
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Oct 2;72(14):e91-e220
pubmed: 29097296
J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2009 Sep;16(3):270-9
pubmed: 19404725
Circulation. 2005 Jun 14;111(23):e380-2
pubmed: 15956139