| Title |
Cost Effectiveness of Antiarrhythmic Medications in Patients Suffering from Atrial Fibrillation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-013-0028-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bernd Brüggenjürgen, Stefan Kohler, Nadja Ezzat, Thomas Reinhold, Stefan N. Willich |
| Abstract |
Atrial fibrillation (AF), a supraventricular tachycardia disorder, is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia affecting 1-2 % of the general population. Prevalence is highly related to age, with every fourth individual older than 40 years old developing AF during his lifetime. Due to an aging population, the prevalence of AF is estimated to at least double within the next 50 years. This article presents AF-related cost-of-illness studies and reviews 19 cost-effectiveness studies and six cost studies published roughly over the past decade, which have compared different antiarrhythmic medications for AF. A systematic literature search for studies published between June 2000 and December 2011 was conducted in PubMed using the combination of keywords ((atrial fibrillation OR atrial flutter) AND cost). Current cost-effectiveness analyses of dronedarone and the pill-in-the-pocket strategy are subject to substantial uncertainties with regard to clinical benefit. Comparing rate control with rhythm control, a cost-effectiveness advantage for rate control was shown in several but not all studies. Within antiarrhythmic drug treatments, magnesium added onto ibutilide was shown to be more cost effective than ibutilide alone. Comparing chemical and electrical cardioversion, the latter was recommended as more cost effective from the healthcare system perspective in all reviewed studies but one. Catheter ablation appeared more cost effective than antiarrhythmic drugs in the medium to long run after 3.2-63.9 years. Admissions to hospital, inpatient care and interventional procedures as well as mortality benefit are key drivers for the cost effectiveness of AF medications. No clear cost-effectiveness advantage emerged for one specific antiarrhythmic drug from the studies that compared antiarrhythmic agents. Rate control as well as catheter ablation appear more cost effective than rhythm control in the treatment of AF. Rate control treatment also seems more cost effective than electrical cardioversion in AF patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 17% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 8 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 55% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2013.
All research outputs
#18,331,227
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#1,597
of 1,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,777
of 192,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#25
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.