ArticleBJS open2024
Economic impact of limb-salvage strategies in chronic limb-threatening ischaemia: modelling and budget impact study based on national registry data.
Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMissed opportunities to reduce numbers of primary major lower-limb amputation and increase limb-salvage procedures when treating chronic limb-threatening ischaemia have previously been identified in the literature. However, the potential economic savings for healthcare providers when salvaging a chronic limb-threatening ischaemia-affected limb have not been well documented.
methodsA model using National Health Service healthcare usage and cost data for 1.6 million individuals and averaged numbers of primary surgical procedures for chronic limb-threatening ischaemia from England and Wales in 2019-2021 was created to perform a budget impact analysis. Two scenarios were tested: the averaged national rates of major lower-limb amputation (above the ankle joint), angioplasty, open bypass surgery or arterial endarterectomy in the National Vascular Registry (current scenario); and revascularization rates adjusted based on the lowest amputation rate reported by the National Vascular Registry at the time of the study (hypothetical scenario). The primary outcome was the net impact on costs to the National Health Service over 12 months after the index procedure.
resultsIn the current scenario, the proportions of different index procedures were 10% for lower-limb major amputation, 55% for angioplasty, 25% for open bypass surgery and 10% for arterial endarterectomy. In the hypothetical scenario, the procedure rates were 3% for major lower-limb amputation, 59% for angioplasty, 27% for open bypass surgery and 11% for arterial endarterectomy. For 16 025 index chronic limb-threatening ischaemia procedures, the total care cost in the current scenario was €243 924 927. In the hypothetical scenario, costs would be reduced for index procedures (-€10 013 814), community care (-€633 943) and major cardiovascular events (-€383 407), and increased for primary care (€59 827), outpatient appointments (€120 050) and subsequent chronic limb-threatening ischaemia-related surgery (€1 179 107). The net saving to the National Health Service would be €9 645 259.
conclusionA shift away from primary major lower-limb amputation towards revascularization could lead to substantial savings for the National Health Service without major cost increases later in the care pathway, indicating that care decisions taken in hospitals have wider benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.