ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of an implantable cardiac defibrillator compared with pharmaceutical therapy in patients hospitalized with arrhythmia in Iran.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arrhythmia is a type of cardiovascular disorder that can be fatal. Several methods for treating cardiac arrhythmia have been developed, the most significant of which are implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) placement and pharmaceutical therapy. The present study aimed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of an ICD strategy compared to the pharmaceutical therapy in patients with arrhythmia in Iran.This is an economic evaluation study that was carried out using the Markov model for lifetime time horizon. The study population includes all patients with cardiac arrhythmia hospitalized in Shafa hospital in Kerman, eastern-south of Iran, between 2017 and 2019. The study sample includes 101 patients who were treated using the ICD method and 101 randomly selected patients who were received pharmaceutical treatment. This study is conducted from the perspective of the health system, and only direct costs (medical and non-medical) are derived. The study’s outcome was defined as the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The data was analyzed using TreeAge software version 2020, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was compared to a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of three times GDP per capita in 2021 ($13,002). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the effect of uncertain model parameters on cost effectiveness anlysis. The results revealed that the lifetime costs of ICD and pharmaceutical therapy strategies in treating cardiac arrhythmia were $41,135 and $8,592, respectively, with outcomes equal to 12.63 and 11.29 QALYs. The ICER of the ICD strategy compared to the pharmaceutical therapy was $24,286 per QALY, and it was not cost-effective. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that at a WTP of three times the GDP per capita, the ICD approach had a 40% cost-effectiveness probability. According to the findings of this study, the ICD strategy, when compared to pharmaceutical therapy, is not cost-effective for the treatment of patients with cardiac arrhythmia in Iran. Resource allocation and cost-cutting measures must be implemented as needed.
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.