English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Recent studies provide evidence of improved clinical benefits associated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) optimization. Our analysis explores the cost-effectiveness of systematically optimized (SO, 3 times a year)  vs . non-systematically optimized (NSO, less than 3 times a year) CRT, whatever the echo optimization method used (manual or SonR® automatic).  A longitudinal cohort model was developed to predict clinical and economic outcomes for SO  vs . NSO strategies over 5 years. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective. Data from CLEAR study post-hoc analysis was used with 199 pts with CRT pacemaker (CRT-P). The main economic outcome measure was incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) expressed as cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) gained. To assess the impact of data uncertainty, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The model also predicts outcomes for the two optimization strategies for CRT-D therapy  vs.  optimal medical treatment (OPT).    Results  At 1 year, ICERs for SO CRT vs. NSO CRT-P range between € 22,226 (Spain) and € 26,977 (Italy). Therefore, on the basis of a Willingness-To-Pay of €30,000 per QALY, the SO method develops into a cost effective strategy from 1 year, onwards. These favorable outcomes are supported by the sensitivity analysis. Systematic optimization of CRT-D might also improve the cost-effectiveness of this device therapy by 27 % to 30 % dependent on the country analyzed, at 5 years.    Conclusions  Our economic evaluation shows promising health economic benefits associated with SO CRT. These preliminary findings need further confirmation.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13561-015-0057-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

health economics review

Exploratory cost-effectiveness analysis of cardiac resynchronization therapy with systematic device optimization vs. standard (non-systematic) optimization: a multinational economic evaluation