Calò Leonardo, Gargaro Alessio, De Ruvo Ermenegildo, Palozzi Gabriele, Sciarra Luigi, Rebecchi Marco, Guarracini Fabrizio, Fagagnini Alessandro, Piroli Enrico, Lioy Ernesto, Chirico Antonio
Division of Cardiology, Policlinico Casilino, ASL Roma B, Via Casilina, 1049, 00169, Rome, Italy.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2013 Jun;37(1):69-78. doi: 10.1007/s10840-013-9783-9. Epub 2013 Mar 21.
Few data are available on actual follow-up costs of remote monitoring (RM) of implantable defibrillators (ICD). Our study aimed at assessing current direct costs of 1-year ICD follow-up based on RM compared with conventional quarterly in-hospital follow-ups.
Patients (N = 233) with indications for ICD were consecutively recruited and randomized at implant to be followed up for 1 year with standard quarterly in-hospital visits or by RM with one in-hospital visit at 12 months, unless additional in-hospital visits were required due to specific patient conditions or RM alarms. Costs were calculated distinguishing between provider and patient costs, excluding RM device and service cost. The frequency of scheduled in-hospital visits was lower in the RM group than in the control arm. Follow-up required 47 min per patient/year in the RM arm versus 86 min in the control arm (p = 0.03) for involved physicians, generating cost estimates for the provider of USD 45 and USD 83 per patient/year, respectively. Costs for nurses were comparable. Overall, the costs associated with RM and standard follow-up were USD 103 ± 27 and 154 ± 21 per patient/year, respectively (p = 0.01). RM was cost-saving for the patients: USD 97 ± 121 per patient/year in the RM group versus 287 ± 160 per patient/year (p = 0.0001).
The time spent by the hospital staff was significantly reduced in the RM group. If the costs for the device and service are not charged to patients or the provider, patients could save about USD 190 per patient/year while the hospital could save USD 51 per patient/year.
关于植入式心脏除颤器(ICD)远程监测(RM)的实际随访成本的可用数据很少。我们的研究旨在评估基于RM的ICD 1年随访的当前直接成本,并与传统的每季度住院随访进行比较。
连续招募有ICD植入指征的患者(N = 233),并在植入时随机分组,进行为期1年的随访,一组为标准的每季度住院就诊,另一组为RM随访,仅在12个月时进行一次住院就诊,除非因特定患者情况或RM警报需要额外的住院就诊。计算成本时区分了医疗机构成本和患者成本,不包括RM设备和服务成本。RM组计划内住院就诊的频率低于对照组。RM组每位患者每年随访所需时间为47分钟,而对照组为86分钟(p = 0.03),参与的医生为医疗机构产生的成本估计分别为每位患者每年45美元和83美元。护士成本相当。总体而言,RM和标准随访相关的成本分别为每位患者每年103±27美元和154±21美元(p = 0.01)。RM对患者而言节省了成本:RM组每位患者每年节省97±121美元,而对照组为287±160美元(p = 0.0001)。
RM组医院工作人员花费的时间显著减少。如果设备和服务成本不由患者或医疗机构承担,患者每年可为每位患者节省约190美元,而医院可为每位患者每年节省51美元。