Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33835328›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2021

Different levels of care for follow-up of adults with congenital heart disease: a cost analysis scrutinizing the impact on medical costs, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits.

Ruben Willems, Fouke Ombelet, Eva Goossens, Katya De Groote, Werner Budts, Stéphane Moniotte, Michèle de Hosson, Liesbet Van Bulck, Ariane Marelli, Philip Moons and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

13 authors.

Ruben WillemsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Entrance 42, Floor 4, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. Ruben.Willems@ugent.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8732-9455
Fouke OmbeletKU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Eva GoossensKU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Katya De GrooteDepartment of Pediatric Cardiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Werner BudtsKU Leuven Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Stéphane MoniottePediatric and Congenital Cardiology Division, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Michèle de HossonDepartment of Adult Congenital Cardiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Liesbet Van BulckKU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Ariane MarelliMcGill Adult Unit for Congenital Heart Disease Excellence (MAUDE Unit), McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Philip MoonsKU Leuven Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Julie De Backer *Research Foundation Flanders (FWO), Brussels, Belgium.
Lieven Annemans *Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Entrance 42, Floor 4, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
BELCODAC consortium

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 12E9816NFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G097516NKoning Boudewijnstichting Fund Joseph Oscar Waldmann-Berteau & Fund Walckiers Van Dessel
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo scrutinize the economic impact of different care levels, such as shared care, in the follow-up of adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients.

methodsThe BELgian COngenital heart disease Database combining Administrative and Clinical data (BELCODAC) was analyzed. Patients (N = 6579) were categorized into five care levels based on their cardiac follow-up pattern between 2006 and 2010. Medical costs, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits were measured between 2011 and 2015.

resultsIn patients with moderate lesions, highly specialized cardiac care (HSC; exclusive follow-up by ACHD specialists) and shared care with predominantly specialized cardiac care (SC+) were associated with significantly lower medical costs and resource use compared to shared care with predominantly general cardiac care (SC-) and general cardiac care (GCC). In the patient population with mild lesions, HSC was associated with better economic outcomes than SC- and GCC, but SC+ was not. HSC was associated with fewer hospitalizations (- 33%) and less pharmaceutical costs (- 46.3%) compared to SC+. Patients with mild and moderate lesions in the no cardiac care (NCC) group had better economic outcomes than those in the GCC and SC- groups, but post-hoc analysis revealed that they had a different patient profile than patients under cardiac care.

conclusionMore specialized care levels are associated with better economic outcomes in patients with mild or moderate lesions in cardiac follow-up. Shared care with strong involvement of ACHD specialists might be a management option to consider. Characteristics of patients without cardiac follow-up but good medium-term economic prospects should be further scrutinized.

Indexed as

Heart Defects, CongenitalAdultCosts and Cost AnalysisEmergency Service, HospitalFollow-Up StudiesHospitalizationHumansCongenital heart diseaseFollow-up careHealthcare economicsHealth services

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.