Abstrakt
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare acute hospital utilization and costs for patients with refractory angina pectoris undergoing spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP).
METHOD: Seventy-three persons were included in this register study. The acute hospital utilization and costs for SCS and EECP were followed over a period from 12 months before treatment to 24 months after treatment using Patient Administrative Support in Skåne for publicly organized care.
RESULTS: SCS was significantly more expensive than EECP (P < 0.001). Both SCS and EECP entailed fewer days of hospitalization for coronary artery disease in the 12-month follow-up compared with the 12 months preceding treatment. Patients treated with EECP showed an association between reduced hospital admissions and an improved Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification class compared with 1 year before treatment. A significant reduction in cost was seen in both the SCS group (P = 0.018 and P = 0.001, respectively) and the EECP group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.045, respectively) during 12 and 24 months of follow-up compared with before treatment. There were no significant differences between the groups for hospitalization days or admissions, including costs, at the different follow-ups.
CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effective treatment modalities such as SCS and EECP are valuable additions to medical and revascularization therapy in patients with refractory angina pectoris. Pre-existing conditions and the patient's preferences should be taken in consideration when clinicians choose between treatments for this group of patients.
Originalsprog | Engelsk |
---|---|
Tidsskrift | Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice Online |
Vol/bind | 19 |
Udgave nummer | 1 |
Sider (fra-til) | 139-47 |
Antal sider | 9 |
ISSN | 1365-2753 |
DOI | |
Status | Udgivet - feb. 2013 |
Udgivet eksternt | Ja |