Search

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart rhythm disorder and poses a growing disease burden worldwide because of an aging population. A multidisciplinary approach with an emphasis on patient education and self-management has been demonstrated to improve outcomes for AF through the engagement of patients in their own care. Although electronic tools (e-tools) such as apps have been proposed to provide patient education and facilitate self-management, there have been few studies to guide the development of these tools for patients with AF. ObjectiveThis study aims to explore the perceptions of patients and health care providers (HCPs) and their attitudes toward the use of e-tools for the self-management of AF. It also seeks to elicit the factors that contribute to these attitudes. MethodsSemistructured qualitative interviews with HCPs and patients were conducted to understand the interpretations and expectations of an e-tool that would be used for the self-management of AF. Interview data were analyzed using an exploratory thematic analysis approach to uncover emergent themes and infer ideas of preferred features in a device. A modified technology acceptance model was developed as a framework to help interpret these findings. Data from the HCPs and patients were compared and contrasted. ResultsBoth patients and HCPs thought that an e-tool would be useful in the self-management of AF. Although both groups favored educational content and monitoring of blood pressure, patients expressed more passivity toward self-care and an ambivalence toward the use of technology to monitor their medical condition. This appears to be related to factors such as a patient’s age, social support, and their attitudes toward technology. Instead, they favored using the app to contact their HCPs. ConclusionsThis study provides insights into significant differences in the attitudes of patients and HCPs toward the use of e-tools for self-care against their priorities. Understanding patients’ motivations and their needs are key to ensuring higher acceptance of such tools.

Objectives: The aim of this early-stage Health Technology Assessment (HTA) was to assess the difference in healthcare costs and effects of fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography (FFRct) compared to standard diagnostics in patients with stable chest pain in The Netherlands. Methods: A decision-tree model was developed to assess the difference in total costs from the hospital perspective, probability of correct diagnoses, and risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at one year follow-up. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the main drivers of the cost difference between the strategies. A threshold analysis on the added price of FFRct analysis (computational analysis only) was conducted. Results: The mean one-year costs were €2,680 per patient for FFRct and €2,915 per patient for standard diagnostics. The one-year probability of correct diagnoses was 0.78 and 0.61, and the probability of major adverse cardiovascular events was 1.92x10-5 and 0.01, respectively. The probability and costs of revascularization and the specificity of coronary computed tomography angiography had the greatest effect on the difference in costs between the strategies. The added price of FFRct analysis should be below €935 per patient to be considered the least costly option. Conclusions: The early-stage HTA findings suggest that FFRct may reduce total healthcare spending, probability of incorrect diagnoses, and major adverse cardiovascular events compared to current diagnostics for patients with stable chest pain in the Dutch healthcare setting over one year. Future cost-effectiveness studies should determine a value-based pricing for FFRct and quantify the economic value of the anticipated therapeutic impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: 1) to analyse the total average healthcare costs of a patient with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), as well as estimating the operational costs of the citizen-rescuer system (CRS); 2) to conduct an early modelling of the effects and healthcare costs of the Dutch CRS in comparison to no CRS. Methods: A health economic modelling study was conducted. Adult patients with OHCA from cardiac causes in the province of Limburg (the Netherlands) were included. The time horizon was from OHCA occurrence up to one year after hospital discharge. First, the total average healthcare costs of OHCA patients were analysed as well as the yearly operating costs of the CRS. Second, an early modelling was conducted to compare from the healthcare perspective the healthcare costs of OHCA patients with the CRS being activated but no responders attended (CRS-NV) versus the CRS being activated with attendance of ≥1 responder(s) (CRS-V). Results: The total average healthcare costs per patient are €42,533. The yearly operating costs for the CRS are approximately €1.5 million per year in the Netherlands. The early modelling of costs and effects showed that the incremental healthcare costs per patient thus were €4,131 in the CRS-V versus the CRS-NV group (€25,184 in the CRS-V group and €21,053 in the CRS-NV group). Incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was 5 per 100 patients (16 per 100 patients in the CRS-V group versus 11 per 100 patients in the CRS-NV group). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €79,662 per QALY for the CRS-V group. Conclusion: This study shows that patients in the CSR-V group had additional health care costs of €4,131 per patient compared to patients in the CRS-NV group. This increase is caused by patients surviving more often, who then continue to utilise health services, which results in a (logic) increase in healthcare costs. For future research, accurate and up-to-date data on effectiveness and costs of the CRS needs to be collected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]