Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18700961›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2008

Cost effectiveness of chest pain unit care in the NHS.

Yemi Oluboyede, Steve Goodacre, Allan Wailoo, ESCAPE Research Team

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Chest pain units or chest pain algorithm?].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2014
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Developing appropriate methods for cost-effectiveness analysis of cluster randomized trials.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yemi OluboyedeHealth Economics and Decision Science (HEDS), School of health and related research, University of Sheffield, 30 Regent Street,Sheffield, UK. y.oluboyede@leeds.ac.uk
Steve Goodacre
Allan Wailoo
ESCAPE Research Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute chest pain is responsible for approximately 700,000 patient attendances per year at emergency departments in England and Wales. A single centre study of selected patients suggested that chest pain unit (CPU) care could be less costly and more effective than routine care for these patients, although a more recent multi-centre study cast doubt on the generalisability of these findings.

methodsOur economic evaluation involved modelling data from the ESCAPE multi-centre trial along with data from other sources to estimate the comparative costs and effects of CPU versus routine care. Cost effectiveness ratios (cost per QALY) were generated from our model.

resultsWe found that CPU compared to routine care resulted in a non-significant increase in effectiveness of 0.0075 QALYs per patient and a non-significant cost decrease of 32 pounds sterling per patient and thus a negative incremental cost effectiveness ratio. If we are willing to pay 20,000 pounds sterling for an additional QALY then there is a 70% probability that CPU care will be considered cost-effective.

conclusionOur analysis shows that CPU care is likely to be slightly more effective and less expensive than routine care, however, these estimates are surrounded by a substantial amount of uncertainty. We cannot reliably conclude that establishing CPU care will represent a cost-effective use of health service resources given the substantial amount of investment it would require.

Indexed as

Chest PainCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEmergency Service, HospitalHealth Care CostsHospital UnitsHumansModels, EconomicMyocardial InfarctionProcess Assessment, Health CareQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality Assurance, Health CareState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID18700961
PMCPMC2527313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.