Open AccessCost‐effectiveness of Screening for Coronary Artery Disease in Asymptomatic Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Additional Atherogenic Risk Factors
Author(s) -
Hayashino Yasuaki,
NagataKobayashi Sizuko,
Morimoto Takeshi,
Maeda Kenji,
Shimbo Takuro,
Fukui Tsuguya
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
journal of general internal medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.746
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 1525-1497
pISSN - 0884-8734
DOI - 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40012.x
Subject(s) - medicine , asymptomatic , coronary artery disease , cost effectiveness , diabetes mellitus , physical therapy , type 2 diabetes , metabolic equivalent , quality adjusted life year , cost effectiveness analysis , cardiology , endocrinology , physical activity , risk analysis (engineering)
OBJECTIVE: Screening for coronary artery disease (CAD) in asymptomatic diabetic patients with two additional atherogenic risk factors has been recommended by the American College of Cardiology/American Diabetes Association, but its cost‐effectiveness is yet to be determined. The present study aims to evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of screening and determine acceptable strategies. DESIGN: Cost‐effectiveness analysis using a Markov model was performed from a societal perspective to measure the clinical benefit and economic consequences of CAD screening in asymptomatic men with diabetes and two additional atherogenic risk factors. We evaluated cohorts of patients stratified by different age groups, and 10 possible combination pairs of atherogenic risks. Incremental cost‐effectiveness of no screening, exercise electrocardiography, exercise echocardiography, or exercise single‐photon emission‐tomography (SPECT) was calculated. Input data were obtained from the published literature. Outcomes were expressed as U.S. dollars per quality‐adjusted life‐year (QALY). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Compared with no screening, incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of exercise electrocardiography was $41,600/QALY in 60‐year‐old asymptomatic diabetic men with hypertension and smoking, but was weakly dominated by exercise echocardiography. Exercise echocardiography was most cost‐effective, with an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of $40,800/QALY. Exercise SPECT was dominated by other strategies. Sensitivity analyses found that results varied depending on age, combination of additional atherogenic risk factors, and diagnostic test performance. CONCLUSIONS: Incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of CAD screening in asymptomatic patients with diabetes and two or more additional atherogenic risk factors is shown to be acceptable from a societal perspective. Exercise echocardiography was the most cost‐effective strategy, followed by exercise electrocardiography.