Economic evaluation of the one-hour rule-out and rule-in algorithm for acute myocardial infarction using the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay in the emergency department

Apoorva Ambavane, Bertil Lindahl, Evangelos Giannitis, Julie Roiz, Joan Mendivil, Lutz Frankenstein, Richard Body, Michael Christ, Roland Bingisser, Aitor Alquezar, Christian Mueller and for the TRAPID-AMI Investigators

PLOS ONE, 2017, vol. 12, issue 11, 1-17

Abstract: Background: The 1-hour (h) algorithm triages patients presenting with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to the emergency department (ED) towards “rule-out,” “rule-in,” or “observation,” depending on baseline and 1-h levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn). The economic consequences of applying the accelerated 1-h algorithm are unknown. Methods and findings: We performed a post-hoc economic analysis in a large, diagnostic, multicenter study of hs-cTnT using central adjudication of the final diagnosis by two independent cardiologists. Length of stay (LoS), resource utilization (RU), and predicted diagnostic accuracy of the 1-h algorithm compared to standard of care (SoC) in the ED were estimated. The ED LoS, RU, and accuracy of the 1-h algorithm was compared to that achieved by the SoC at ED discharge. Expert opinion was sought to characterize clinical implementation of the 1-h algorithm, which required blood draws at ED presentation and 1h, after which “rule-in” patients were transferred for coronary angiography, “rule-out” patients underwent outpatient stress testing, and “observation” patients received SoC. Unit costs were for the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Germany. The sensitivity and specificity for the 1-h algorithm were 87% and 96%, respectively, compared to 69% and 98% for SoC. The mean ED LoS for the 1-h algorithm was 4.3h—it was 6.5h for SoC, which is a reduction of 33%. The 1-h algorithm was associated with reductions in RU, driven largely by the shorter LoS in the ED for patients with a diagnosis other than AMI. The estimated total costs per patient were £2,480 for the 1-h algorithm compared to £4,561 for SoC, a reduction of up to 46%. Conclusions: The analysis shows that the use of 1-h algorithm is associated with reduction in overall AMI diagnostic costs, provided it is carefully implemented in clinical practice. These results need to be prospectively validated in the future.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0187662 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 87662&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0187662

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187662

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().