Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope: Randomized assessment of syncope trial

Andrew D. Krahn, George J. Klein, Raymond Yee, Jeffrey S Hoch, Allan C. Skanes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

133 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the cost implications of two investigation strategies in patients with unexplained syncope. BACKOROUND: Establishing a diagnosis in patients with unexplained syncope is complicated by infrequent and unpredictable events. The cost-effectiveness of immediate, prolonged monitoring as an alternative to conventional diagnostic strategies has not been studied. METHODS: Sixty patients (age 66 ± 14 years; 33 males) with unexplained syncope and LV ejection fraction >35% were randomized to conventional testing with an external loop recorder, tilt and electrophysiologic (EP) testing, or prolonged monitoring with an implantable loop recorder with one-year monitoring. If patients remained undiagnosed after their assigned strategy, they were offered a crossover to the alternate strategy. Cost analysis of the two testing strategies was performed. RESULTS: Fourteen of 30 patients who were being monitored were diagnosed at a cost of $2,731 ± $285 per patient and $5,852 ± $610 per diagnosis. In contrast, only six of 30 conventional patients were diagnosed (20% vs. 47%, p = 0.029), at a cost of $1,683 ± $505 per patient (p < 0.0001) and $8,414 ± $2,527 per diagnosis (p < 0.0001). After crossover, a diagnosis was obtained in 1 of 5 patients undergoing conventional testing, compared with 8 of 21 patients who completed monitoring (20% vs. 38%, p = 0.44). Overall, a strategy of monitoring followed by tilt and EP testing was associated with a diagnostic yield of 50%, at a cost of $2,937 ± $579 per patient and $5,875 ± $1,159 per diagnosis. Conventional testing followed by monitoring was associated with a diagnostic yield of 47%, at a greater cost of $3,683 ± $1,490 per patient (p = 0.013) and a greater cost per diagnosis ($7,891 ± $3,193, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of primary monitoring is more cost-effective than conventional testing in establishing a diagnosis in recurrent unexplained syncope.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)495-501
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume42
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 6 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Syncope
Costs and Cost Analysis
Cost-Benefit Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope : Randomized assessment of syncope trial. / Krahn, Andrew D.; Klein, George J.; Yee, Raymond; Hoch, Jeffrey S; Skanes, Allan C.

In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 42, No. 3, 06.08.2003, p. 495-501.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Krahn, Andrew D. ; Klein, George J. ; Yee, Raymond ; Hoch, Jeffrey S ; Skanes, Allan C. / Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope : Randomized assessment of syncope trial. In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2003 ; Vol. 42, No. 3. pp. 495-501.
@article{f326ba3bc12949579d256fd2c644ec2e,
title = "Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope: Randomized assessment of syncope trial",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the cost implications of two investigation strategies in patients with unexplained syncope. BACKOROUND: Establishing a diagnosis in patients with unexplained syncope is complicated by infrequent and unpredictable events. The cost-effectiveness of immediate, prolonged monitoring as an alternative to conventional diagnostic strategies has not been studied. METHODS: Sixty patients (age 66 ± 14 years; 33 males) with unexplained syncope and LV ejection fraction >35{\%} were randomized to conventional testing with an external loop recorder, tilt and electrophysiologic (EP) testing, or prolonged monitoring with an implantable loop recorder with one-year monitoring. If patients remained undiagnosed after their assigned strategy, they were offered a crossover to the alternate strategy. Cost analysis of the two testing strategies was performed. RESULTS: Fourteen of 30 patients who were being monitored were diagnosed at a cost of $2,731 ± $285 per patient and $5,852 ± $610 per diagnosis. In contrast, only six of 30 conventional patients were diagnosed (20{\%} vs. 47{\%}, p = 0.029), at a cost of $1,683 ± $505 per patient (p < 0.0001) and $8,414 ± $2,527 per diagnosis (p < 0.0001). After crossover, a diagnosis was obtained in 1 of 5 patients undergoing conventional testing, compared with 8 of 21 patients who completed monitoring (20{\%} vs. 38{\%}, p = 0.44). Overall, a strategy of monitoring followed by tilt and EP testing was associated with a diagnostic yield of 50{\%}, at a cost of $2,937 ± $579 per patient and $5,875 ± $1,159 per diagnosis. Conventional testing followed by monitoring was associated with a diagnostic yield of 47{\%}, at a greater cost of $3,683 ± $1,490 per patient (p = 0.013) and a greater cost per diagnosis ($7,891 ± $3,193, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of primary monitoring is more cost-effective than conventional testing in establishing a diagnosis in recurrent unexplained syncope.",
author = "Krahn, {Andrew D.} and Klein, {George J.} and Raymond Yee and Hoch, {Jeffrey S} and Skanes, {Allan C.}",
year = "2003",
month = "8",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00659-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "495--501",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope

T2 - Randomized assessment of syncope trial

AU - Krahn, Andrew D.

AU - Klein, George J.

AU - Yee, Raymond

AU - Hoch, Jeffrey S

AU - Skanes, Allan C.

PY - 2003/8/6

Y1 - 2003/8/6

N2 - OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the cost implications of two investigation strategies in patients with unexplained syncope. BACKOROUND: Establishing a diagnosis in patients with unexplained syncope is complicated by infrequent and unpredictable events. The cost-effectiveness of immediate, prolonged monitoring as an alternative to conventional diagnostic strategies has not been studied. METHODS: Sixty patients (age 66 ± 14 years; 33 males) with unexplained syncope and LV ejection fraction >35% were randomized to conventional testing with an external loop recorder, tilt and electrophysiologic (EP) testing, or prolonged monitoring with an implantable loop recorder with one-year monitoring. If patients remained undiagnosed after their assigned strategy, they were offered a crossover to the alternate strategy. Cost analysis of the two testing strategies was performed. RESULTS: Fourteen of 30 patients who were being monitored were diagnosed at a cost of $2,731 ± $285 per patient and $5,852 ± $610 per diagnosis. In contrast, only six of 30 conventional patients were diagnosed (20% vs. 47%, p = 0.029), at a cost of $1,683 ± $505 per patient (p < 0.0001) and $8,414 ± $2,527 per diagnosis (p < 0.0001). After crossover, a diagnosis was obtained in 1 of 5 patients undergoing conventional testing, compared with 8 of 21 patients who completed monitoring (20% vs. 38%, p = 0.44). Overall, a strategy of monitoring followed by tilt and EP testing was associated with a diagnostic yield of 50%, at a cost of $2,937 ± $579 per patient and $5,875 ± $1,159 per diagnosis. Conventional testing followed by monitoring was associated with a diagnostic yield of 47%, at a greater cost of $3,683 ± $1,490 per patient (p = 0.013) and a greater cost per diagnosis ($7,891 ± $3,193, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of primary monitoring is more cost-effective than conventional testing in establishing a diagnosis in recurrent unexplained syncope.

AB - OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the cost implications of two investigation strategies in patients with unexplained syncope. BACKOROUND: Establishing a diagnosis in patients with unexplained syncope is complicated by infrequent and unpredictable events. The cost-effectiveness of immediate, prolonged monitoring as an alternative to conventional diagnostic strategies has not been studied. METHODS: Sixty patients (age 66 ± 14 years; 33 males) with unexplained syncope and LV ejection fraction >35% were randomized to conventional testing with an external loop recorder, tilt and electrophysiologic (EP) testing, or prolonged monitoring with an implantable loop recorder with one-year monitoring. If patients remained undiagnosed after their assigned strategy, they were offered a crossover to the alternate strategy. Cost analysis of the two testing strategies was performed. RESULTS: Fourteen of 30 patients who were being monitored were diagnosed at a cost of $2,731 ± $285 per patient and $5,852 ± $610 per diagnosis. In contrast, only six of 30 conventional patients were diagnosed (20% vs. 47%, p = 0.029), at a cost of $1,683 ± $505 per patient (p < 0.0001) and $8,414 ± $2,527 per diagnosis (p < 0.0001). After crossover, a diagnosis was obtained in 1 of 5 patients undergoing conventional testing, compared with 8 of 21 patients who completed monitoring (20% vs. 38%, p = 0.44). Overall, a strategy of monitoring followed by tilt and EP testing was associated with a diagnostic yield of 50%, at a cost of $2,937 ± $579 per patient and $5,875 ± $1,159 per diagnosis. Conventional testing followed by monitoring was associated with a diagnostic yield of 47%, at a greater cost of $3,683 ± $1,490 per patient (p = 0.013) and a greater cost per diagnosis ($7,891 ± $3,193, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of primary monitoring is more cost-effective than conventional testing in establishing a diagnosis in recurrent unexplained syncope.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042490666&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042490666&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00659-4

DO - 10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00659-4

M3 - Article

C2 - 12906979

AN - SCOPUS:0042490666

VL - 42

SP - 495

EP - 501

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 3

ER -