The budget impact of implementing atrial fibrillation-screening in European countries
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11292408 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundStrokes cause an estimated annual health care burden of 170 billion euros across Europe. Atrial fibrillation is one of the major risk factors for stroke and increases the individual risk 4.2-fold. But prevention with anticoagulants may reduce this risk by 70%. Screening methods are employed to detect previously undetected atrial fibrillation. Screening studies in various European countries show a high degree of undetected atrial fibrillation. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of systematic screening with a smartphone application, named Preventicus Heartbeats. It is a hands-on screening tool for use on smartphone to diagnose AF with high sensitivity and specificity.MethodsA previously published model for calculating screening cost-effectiveness was extended to 6 European countries covering a wide range in terms of treatment costs and epidemiologic parameters.ResultsThe use of screening lowers the cost per case in countries with comparatively high levels of health care costs (Switzerland: -€75; UK: -€7). Moderate higher costs per case were observed in 4 countries (Greece: €6; Netherlands: €15). Low levels of health care costs result in less or no potential for further cost reduction (Poland: €20; Serbia: €33). In all countries considered, the model showed an increase in effectiveness measures both in the number of strokes avoided and the quality adjusted life years. The number of strokes avoided per 1000 participants ranged from 2.52 (Switzerland) to 4.44 (Poland). Quality-adjusted life-years per case gained from screening ranged from 0.0105 (Switzerland) to 0.0187 (Poland). The screening procedure dominated in two countries (Switzerland, UK). For the remaining countries, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio ranged from €489/QALY (Greece) to €2548/QALY (Serbia).ConclusionThe model results showed a strong dependence of the results on the country-specific costs for stroke treatment. The use of the investigated screening method is close to cost-neutral or cost-reducing in the Western European countries and Greece. In countries with low price levels, higher cost increases due to AF screening are to be expected. Lower costs of anticoagulation, which are expected due to the upcoming patent expiry of direct anticoagulants, have a positive effect on the cost result.
| S-EPMC8882287 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAtrial fibrillation (AF) screening may increase early detection and reduce complications of AF. European, Australian and World Heart Federation guidelines recommend opportunistic screening, despite a current lack of clear evidence supporting a net benefit for systematic screening. Where screening is implemented, the most appropriate approaches are unknown. We explored the views of European stakeholders about opportunities and challenges of implementing four AF screening scenarios.DesignTelephone-based semi-structured interviews with results reported using Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research guidelines. Data were thematically analysed using the framework approach.SettingAF screening stakeholders in 11 European countries.ParticipantsHealthcare professionals and regulators (n=24) potentially involved in AF screening implementation.InterventionFour AF screening scenarios: single time point opportunistic, opportunistic prolonged, systematic single time point/prolonged and patient-led screening.Primary outcome measuresStakeholder views about the challenges and feasibility of implementing the screening scenarios in the respective national/regional healthcare system.ResultsThree themes developed. (1) Current screening approaches: there are no national AF screening programmes, with most AF detected in symptomatic patients. Patient-led screening exists via personal devices, creating screening inequity. (2) Feasibility of screening: single time point opportunistic screening in primary care using single-lead ECG devices was considered the most feasible. Software algorithms may aid identification of suitable patients and telehealth services have potential to support diagnosis. (3) Implementation requirements: sufficient evidence of benefit is required. National screening processes are required due to different payment mechanisms and health service regulations. Concerns about data security, and inclusivity for those without primary care access or personal devices must be addressed.ConclusionsThere is an overall awareness of AF screening. Opportunistic screening appears the most feasible across Europe. Challenges are health inequalities, identification of best target groups for screening, streamlined processes, the need for evidence of benefit and a tailored approach adapted to national realities.
| S-EPMC9214372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLong-term management of chronic conditions, such as atrial fibrillation (AF), require frequent interactions with the healthcare systems. The multinational EUropean Patient Survey in Atrial Fibrillation (EUPS-AF) was conducted to investigate patient satisfaction with AF management in different of five European healthcare systems at a time of changing treatment paradigms for stroke prophylaxis, prior to the advent of newer oral anticoagulants.MethodsAdults (>18 years) were recruited at random from the total populations of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK using a randomized telephone dialling system. At least 300 respondents per country reporting to have a diagnosis of AF or receiving oral anticoagulation therapy for suspected AF or to have a heart rhythm disturbance completed a structured telephone interview.ResultsMost respondents were satisfied with their treatment for AF over the previous 12 months, with 85.5% (n?=?1289) rating their care as good or better. Suboptimal clinical practices, however, were identified in several key areas. Coordination of primary and secondary care and a lack of patient engagement and support were particular issues, especially for those patients likely to have extensive contact with their healthcare system.ConclusionsIn the context of Europe-wide guidelines for management of AF, most patients with AF were satisfied with their care, but for a greater proportion of patients, some aspects are unsatisfactory. Patient-centred surveys, such as the EUPS-AF, are crucial for understanding the factors that contribute to patient satisfaction and compliance with long-term treatment for chronic conditions.
| S-EPMC4219387 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsWe sought to describe the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Europe after the release of the 2010 AF Guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology.Methods and resultsThe PREFER in AF registry enrolled consecutive patients with AF from January 2012 to January 2013 in 461 centres in seven European countries. Seven thousand two hundred and forty-three evaluable patients were enrolled, aged 71.5 ± 11 years, 60.1% male, CHA2DS2VASc score 3.4 ± 1.8 (mean ± standard deviation). Thirty per cent patients had paroxysmal, 24.0% had persistent, 7.2% had long-standing persistent, and 38.8% had permanent AF. Oral anticoagulation was used in the majority of patients: 4799 patients (66.3%) received a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) as mono-therapy, 720 patients a combination of VKA and antiplatelet agents (9.9%), 442 patients (6.1%) a new oral anticoagulant drugs (NOAC). Antiplatelet agents alone were given to 808 patients (11.2%), no antithrombotic therapy to 474 patients (6.5%). Of 7034 evaluable patients, 5530 (78.6%) patients were adequately rate controlled (mean heart rate 60-100 bpm). Half of the patients (50.7%) received rhythm control therapy by electrical cardioversion (18.1%), pharmacological cardioversion (19.5%), antiarrhythmic drugs (amiodarone 24.1%, flecainide or propafenone 13.5%, sotalol 5.5%, dronedarone 4.0%), and catheter ablation (5.0%).ConclusionThe management of AF patients in 2012 has adapted to recent evidence and guideline recommendations. Oral anticoagulant therapy with VKA (majority) or NOACs is given to over 80% of eligible patients, including those at risk for bleeding. Rate is often adequately controlled, and rhythm control therapy is widely used.
| S-EPMC3864758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess budget impact of the implementation of an anticoagulation clinic (AC) compared to usual care (UC), in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).MethodA decision tree was designed to analyze the cost and events rates over a 1-year horizon. The patients were distributed according to treatment, 30% Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) regimens and the rest to warfarin. The thromboembolism and bleeding were derived from observational studies which demonstrated that ACs had important impact in reducing the frequency of these events compared with UC, due to higher adherence with DOACs and proportion of time in therapeutic range (TTR) with warfarin. Costs were derived from the transactional platform of Colombian government, healthcare authority reimbursement and published studies. The values were expressed in American dollars (USD). The exchanged rate used was COP $3.693 per dollar.ResultsDuring 1 year of follow-up, in a cohort of 228 patients there were estimated 48 bleedings, 6 thromboembolisms in AC group versus 84 bleedings, and 12 thromboembolisms events in patients receiving UC. Total costs related to AC were $126 522 compared with $141 514 in UC. The AC had an important reduction in the cost of clinical events versus UC ($52 085 vs $110 749) despite a higher cost of care facilities ($74 436 vs $30 765). A sensibility analysis suggested that in the 83% of estimations, the AC produced savings varied between $27 078 and $135 391.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that AC compared with UC, produced an important savings in the oral anticoagulation therapy for patients with NVAF.
| S-EPMC7968007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionNew biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies are anticipated to bring significant cost savings and increase access to treatment. The rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 has recently been approved in Europe in all indications held by reference rituximab (RTX), including rheumatoid arthritis, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We analyzed the budgetary impact of the introduction of CT-P10 into the European Union (EU) for use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cancer diagnoses, using a budget impact analysis model.MethodsThe model used a base case scenario in which the 1-year uptake of CT-P10 was estimated at 30%, and the cost of CT-P10 was assumed to be 70% of the cost of RTX. A second 1-year scenario was also modeled, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 50% (scenario 2). Finally, 3-year time horizon outcomes were calculated, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 30%, 40%, and 50% in the first, second, and third years, respectively.ResultsIn the base case scenario, the introduction of CT-P10 was associated with projected savings of €90.04 million in the first year, which would allow 7531 additional patients to access rituximab treatment. This was equivalent to a 6.4% increase in the number of rituximab-treated patients. In scenario 2, budget savings were €150.10 million, with a total of 12,551 additional patients able to access rituximab, equivalent to a 10.7% increase. Over a 3-year time horizon, projected budget savings were approximately €570 million, equating to 47,695 additional patients able to access rituximab.ConclusionsThe model predicted that the introduction of CT-P10 in the EU will be associated with significant budget savings, the reallocation of which will enable many more patients to access rituximab treatment. This is likely to have a significant impact on health gains at patient and societal levels.FundingCELLTRION Healthcare Co., Ltd. sponsored the development and analysis of the budget impact analysis model.
| S-EPMC5427122 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionInflammatory autoimmune diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis) have a considerable impact on patients' quality of life and healthcare budgets. Biosimilar infliximab (Remsima(®)) has been authorized by the European Medicines Agency for the management of inflammatory autoimmune diseases based on a data package demonstrating efficacy, safety, and quality comparable to the reference infliximab product (Remicade(®)). This analysis aims to estimate the 1-year budget impact of the introduction of Remsima in five European countries.MethodsA budget impact model for the introduction of Remsima in Germany, the UK, Italy, the Netherlands, and Belgium was developed over a 1-year time horizon. Infliximab-naïve and switch patient groups were considered. Only direct drug costs were included. The model used the drug-acquisition cost of Remicade. The list price of Remsima was not known at the time of the analysis, and was assumed to be 10-30% less than that of Remicade. Key variables were tested in the sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe annual cost savings resulting from the introduction of Remsima were projected to range from €2.89 million (Belgium, 10% discount) to €33.80 million (Germany, 30% discount). If any such savings made were used to treat additional patients with Remsima, 250 (Belgium, 10% discount) to 2602 (Germany, 30% discount) additional patients could be treated. The cumulative cost savings across the five included countries and the six licensed disease areas were projected to range from €25.79 million (10% discount) to €77.37 million (30% discount). Sensitivity analyses showed the number of patients treated with infliximab to be directly correlated with projected cost savings, with disease prevalence and patient weight having a smaller impact, and incidence the least impact.ConclusionThe introduction of Remsima could lead to considerable drug cost-related savings across the six licensed disease areas in the five European countries.FundingMundipharma International Ltd.
| S-EPMC4569679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and is a major cardiovascular challenge due to its close association with increased morbidity and mortality. Although the incidence and prevalence of AF is slightly lower in developing countries than in developed countries, the AF-associated risk of stroke is similar. Treatment of AF is far from satisfactory in developing countries, which may be due to limited health-care resources and social and racial characteristics that differ from Western populations. Chronic rate control is still the main treatment strategy of persistent AF because anti-arrhythmic drugs have only a modest long-term effect on maintenance of sinus rhythm, and no superior impact in terms of cardiovascular outcomes. With the development of ablation techniques and strategies, more AF patients received catheter ablation, although the benefit, complications, and high recurrence rate associated with AF ablation remain under investigation. Improvement in antithrombotic therapy of AF has been observed, although still fewer patients receive oral anticoagulants in developing countries than in Western countries. Novel treatment for the prevention of thromboembolism, such as new oral anticoagulants with different mechanisms of action or the percutaneous transcatheter closure of the left atrial appendage, has recently been introduced in developing countries as an alternative option for the prevention of AF-associated strokes. More data are needed regarding upstream therapy.
| S-EPMC4956295 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThere is no clear guidance on how to implement opportunistic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening in daily clinical practice.ObjectivesThis study evaluated the perception of general practitioners (GPs) about value and practicalities of implementing screening for AF, focusing on opportunistic single-time point screening with a single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) device.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with a survey developed to assess overall perception concerning AF screening, feasibility of opportunistic single-lead ECG screening and implementation requirements and barriers.ResultsA total of 659 responses were collected (36.1% Eastern, 33.4% Western, 12.1% Southern, 10.0% Northern Europe, 8.3% United Kingdom & Ireland). The perceived need for standardized AF screening was rated as 82.7 on a scale from 0 to 100. The vast majority (88.0%) indicated no AF screening program is established in their region. Three out of four GPs (72.1%, lowest in Eastern and Southern Europe) were equipped with a 12-lead ECG, while a single-lead ECG was less common (10.8%, highest in United Kingdom & Ireland). Three in five GPs (59.3%) feel confident ruling out AF on a single-lead ECG strip. Assistance through more education (28.7%) and a tele-healthcare service offering advice on ambiguous tracings (25.2%) would be helpful. Preferred strategies to overcome barriers like insufficient (qualified) staff, included integrating AF screening with other healthcare programs (24.9%) and algorithms to identify patients most suitable for AF screening (24.3%).ConclusionGPs perceive a strong need for a standardized AF screening approach. Additional resources may be required to have it widely adopted into clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9975716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common and morbid arrhythmia. Stroke is a major hazard of AF and may be preventable with oral anticoagulation. Yet since AF is often asymptomatic, many individuals with AF may be unaware and do not receive treatment that could prevent a stroke. Screening for AF has gained substantial attention in recent years as several studies have demonstrated that screening is feasible. Advances in technology have enabled a variety of approaches to facilitate screening for AF using both medical-prescribed devices as well as consumer electronic devices capable of detecting AF. Yet controversy about the utility of AF screening remains owing to concerns about potential harms resulting from screening in the absence of randomized data demonstrating effectiveness of screening on outcomes such as stroke and bleeding. In this review, we summarize current literature, present technology, population-based screening considerations, and consensus guidelines addressing the role of AF screening in practice.
| S-EPMC7388078 | biostudies-literature