Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden

Vasily Lukyanov,1 Purvee Parikh,2 Manish Wadhwa,2 Alexandria Dunn,2 Roderick van Leerdam,1 Johan Engdahl,3 Goran Medic1 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Chief Medical Office, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA; 3Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, SwedenCorrespondence: Goran Medic, Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, High Tech Campus 52, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Tel +31-(0)6-18 19 37 82, Email [email protected]: Patients who have experienced a cryptogenic stroke (CS) may benefit from extended monitoring and possible earlier detection of atrial fibrillation (AF), allowing for the timely initiation of appropriate pharmacotherapy.Objective: This economic study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost outcomes of using mid-term cardiac monitors (referred to as “ePatch”) versus ILR-only in post-CS patients in the UK, Netherlands (NL) and Sweden.Methods: An existing cost-minimization model was modified to fit healthcare settings in the UK, Netherlands and Sweden. The model’s target population was composed of adult patients who had previously experienced a CS, but had no documented history of AF. The model compares the one-year direct medical costs between two groups: one group receiving wearable ePatch, the other group proceeding directly to ILR.Results: When applied to a group of 1,000 patients, the ePatch versus ILR approach resulted in cost savings, due to combination of reduced expenses and decreased modelled occurrence of recurrent strokes in all three countries studied. In the base case analysis, the cost savings per patient with detected AF for ePatch ranged from 3.4– 6.0 times, depending on the country.Conclusion: Utilizing ePatch extended wear Holter for mid-term ECG monitoring in CS patients represents a cost-saving alternative to monitoring with ILR. The cost savings were achieved by reducing device expenses and by prevention of recurrent strokes via earlier anticoagulation initiation. Preventing recurrent strokes in this population is highly significant, as it can lead to improved long-term health outcomes and reduced overall healthcare costs.Keywords: outpatient cardiac monitoring, stroke, holter, atrial fibrillation, electrocardiography, economic evaluation, secondary prevention, telemedicine, remote monitoring

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2024-12-01
Primary Topic
Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
article

Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden

article en

Abstract

Vasily Lukyanov,1 Purvee Parikh,2 Manish Wadhwa,2 Alexandria Dunn,2 Roderick van Leerdam,1 Johan Engdahl,3 Goran Medic1 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Chief Medical Office, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA; 3Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, SwedenCorrespondence: Goran Medic, Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, High Tech Campus 52, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Tel +31-(0)6-18 19 37 82, Email [email protected]: Patients who have experienced a cryptogenic stroke (CS) may benefit from extended monitoring and possible earlier detection of atrial fibrillation (AF), allowing for the timely initiation of appropriate pharmacotherapy.Objective: This economic study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost outcomes of using mid-term cardiac monitors (referred to as “ePatch”) versus ILR-only in post-CS patients in the UK, Netherlands (NL) and Sweden.Methods: An existing cost-minimization model was modified to fit healthcare settings in the UK, Netherlands and Sweden. The model’s target population was composed of adult patients who had previously experienced a CS, but had no documented history of AF. The model compares the one-year direct medical costs between two groups: one group receiving wearable ePatch, the other group proceeding directly to ILR.Results: When applied to a group of 1,000 patients, the ePatch versus ILR approach resulted in cost savings, due to combination of reduced expenses and decreased modelled occurrence of recurrent strokes in all three countries studied. In the base case analysis, the cost savings per patient with detected AF for ePatch ranged from 3.4– 6.0 times, depending on the country.Conclusion: Utilizing ePatch extended wear Holter for mid-term ECG monitoring in CS patients represents a cost-saving alternative to monitoring with ILR. The cost savings were achieved by reducing device expenses and by prevention of recurrent strokes via earlier anticoagulation initiation. Preventing recurrent strokes in this population is highly significant, as it can lead to improved long-term health outcomes and reduced overall healthcare costs.Keywords: outpatient cardiac monitoring, stroke, holter, atrial fibrillation, electrocardiography, economic evaluation, secondary prevention, telemedicine, remote monitoring

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden · SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS