Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35835938›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2022

Cost-Utility and Budget Impact Analysis of Implementing Anticoagulation Clinics and Point-of-Care Monitoring Devices in Anticoagulated Patients in Argentina.

Osvaldo Ulises Garay, Gonzalo Guiñazú, Yolanda Patricia Adamczuk, Cristina Duboscq

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Osvaldo Ulises GarayRoche Diagnostics International Ltd, Rotkreuz, Switzerland.
Gonzalo GuiñazúRoche Diagnostics Argentina, Rawson 3150 B1610BAL-Ricardo Rojas, Tigre, Buenos Aires, Argentina. gonzalogermang@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5579-5902
Yolanda Patricia AdamczukHospital General de Agudos Dr. Enrique Tornú, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Cristina DuboscqHospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
El Hospital General de Agudos Carlos G. Durand · ARHospital Británico de Buenos Aires · ARHospital General de Niños Ricardo Gutierrez · ARRoche (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWorldwide, 1 % of the population receives anticoagulation therapy, with prevalence higher in older adults. Difficulties in the adequate management of these patients have led to the development of strategies focused on achieving therapeutic control and reducing adverse events with efficient use of resources.

objectiveTo estimate the cost utility and budget impact on the Argentinean health system of implementation of anticoagulation clinics (ACs) (with and without use of point-of-care [POC] CoaguChek

methodsFor the cost-utility analysis, a cohort-based state transition model was designed to compare costs and health outcomes of implementing ACs for outpatient management of anticoagulated patients. The budget impact analysis used an analytical model to estimate the differential costs of implementing an AC and the expected adverse events avoided, and the differential costs of an international normalized ratio (INR) determination using a POC device rather than a conventional laboratory.

resultsWe calculated the study outcomes for a cohort of 1000 patients. Considering a 5 % discount rate, the use of ACs generated 13.9 additional quality-adjusted life-years (0.014 per patient) and 12.5 additional life-years (0.013 per patient). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of AC implementation with and without the use of POC devices compared with the scenario without ACs were dominant in both cases. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, nearly all simulated results were cost effective (i.e., below the 1 or 3 gross domestic product per capita thresholds). Budget impact analysis results showed AC implementation generated savings from the first year of implementation, with savings of AR $265,325 by year 5. The addition of POC devices in the ACs also generated savings as early as the first year of implementation, with savings of AR $488,072 by year 5 (AR $488 per patient).

conclusionsAnticoagulation clinics are estimated to be cost effective and generate notable savings in the treatment of patients on long-term oral anticoagulant therapy when compared with non-AC settings. These savings are considerably higher when POC devices are added as part of the patient management, due to lower laboratory technician costs per INR determination.

Identifiers

PMID35835938
PMCPMC9440177
OpenAlexW4285389653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.