Search

Plain language summary What is this article about?Continuous vital sign monitoring assists in identifying deteriorating patients outside intensive care. This study analyses changes in clinical outcomes and costs before and after implementation of a clinical vital sign monitoring device in postsurgical patients on a general ward in a Dutch hospital. What were the results?Results show that after implementation, patients were less likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit, had shorter length of stay and had lower hospital stay costs. Aim: To assess changes in outcomes and costs upon implementation of continuous vital sign monitoring in postsurgical patients. Materials & methods: Retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and in-hospital costs compared with a control period. Results: During the intervention period patients were less frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.004), had shorter length of stay (p < 0.001) and lower costs (p < 0.001). The intervention was associated with a lower odds of ICU admission (odds ratio: 0.422; p = 0.007) and ICU related costs (odds ratio: -662.4; p = 0.083). Conclusion: Continuous vital sign monitoring may have contributed to fewer ICU admissions and lower ICU costs in postsurgical patients. Tweetable abstractA retrospective study of clinical outcomes and costs compared with a control period indicated that implementation of continuous vital sign monitoring in postsurgical patients in a general hospital in The Netherlands may have contributed to fewer intensive care unit admissions and lower intensive care unit costs.

Aim: To assess changes in outcomes and costs upon implementation of continuous vital sign monitoring in postsurgical patients. Materials & methods: Retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and in-hospital costs compared with a control period. Results: During the intervention period patients were less frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.004), had shorter length of stay (p < 0.001) and lower costs (p < 0.001). The intervention was associated with a lower odds of ICU admission (odds ratio: 0.422; p = 0.007) and ICU related costs (odds ratio: -662.4; p = 0.083). Conclusion: Continuous vital sign monitoring may have contributed to fewer ICU admissions and lower ICU costs in postsurgical patients.

Goran Medic,1,2 Nikos Kotsopoulos,3 Mark P Connolly,2,3 Jennifer Lavelle,4 Vincent Norlock,4 Manish Wadhwa,4 Belinda A Mohr,5 Wayne M Derkac4 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Department of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; 3Global Market Access Solutions LLC, Charlotte, NC, USA; 4BioTelemetry, Inc., A Philips Company, Malvern, PA, USA; 5Chief Medical Office, Philips, Cambridge, MA, USACorrespondence: Goran MedicChief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, High Tech Campus 37-3.009, Eindhoven, 5656 AG, NetherlandsTel +31-61-819-3782Email goran.medic@philips.comPurpose: The aim of this study was to compare costs and outcomes of mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry (MCOT) patch followed by implantable loop recorder (ILR) compared to ILR alone in cryptogenic stroke patients from the US health-care payors’ perspective.Patients and Methods: A quantitative decision tree cost-minimization simulation model was developed. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older and were diagnosed with having a cryptogenic stroke, without previously documented atrial fibrillation (AF). All patients were assigned first to one then to the alternative monitoring strategies. Following AF detection, patients were initiated on oral anticoagulants (OAC). The model assessed direct costs for one year attributed to MCOT patch followed by ILR or ILR alone using a monitoring duration of 30 days post-cryptogenic stroke.Results: In the base case modeling, the MCOT patch arm detected 4.6 more patients with AFs compared to the ILR alone arm in a cohort of 1000 patients (209 vs 45 patients with detected AFs, respectively). Using MCOT patch followed by ILR in half of the patients initially undiagnosed with AF leads to significant cost savings of US$4,083,214 compared to ILR alone in a cohort of 1000 patients. Cost per patient with detected AF was significantly lower in the MCOT patch arm $29,598 vs $228,507 in the ILR only arm.Conclusion: An init

Tim Kinnaird,1 Goran Medic,2 Gianni Casella,3 Francois Schiele,4 Upendra Kaul,5 Peter W Radke,6 Indra Eijgelshoven,2 Gert Bergman,2 Derek P Chew71Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK; 2Mapi-Health Economics Outcomes Research and Strategic Market Access, Houten, the Netherlands; 3Ospedale Maggiore, Unità Operativa di Cardiologia, Bologna, Italy; 4Hôpital Jean Minjoz, Besançon Cedex, France; 5Fortis Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, Okhla Road, New Delhi, India; 6Schön Klinik Neustadt, Neustadt, Germany; 7Flinders University; Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Southern Adelaide Health Service, Bedford Park, SA, AustraliaAbstract: In the absence of head-to-head clinical data, the objective of this study was to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of a bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy with that of heparin monotherapy in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) intended for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. A systematic literature review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials to build a network of bivalirudin and heparin monotherapy strategies in STEMI patients using heparin, with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor as a common reference strategy. At 30 days, the bivalirudin-based strategy was expected to result in lower mortality rates than heparin monotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; credible limit [CrL], 0.32–0.95). This relationship was sustained at 1 year. At 30 days, the risk for stroke (OR, 0.88; CrL, 0.37–2.13), myocardial infarction (OR, 0.79; CrL, 0.40–1.55), and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major and minor bleedings (OR, 0.66; CrL, 0.45–0.98) tended to be numerically reduced with bivalirudin in comparison with heparin monotherapy. For patients with STEMI intended for primary percutaneous coronary intervention, bivalirudin is associated with lower mortality rates in comparison with heparin

Goran Medic,1 Kyoko Higashi,1 Kavi J Littlewood,1 Teresa Diez,2 Ola Granström,3 René S Kahn41MAPI Consultancy, Houten, The Netherlands; 2AstraZeneca, Zaventem, Belgium; 3AstraZeneca, Södertälje, Sweden; 4Division of Neuroscience at the Utrecht University Medical Center, Utrecht, The NetherlandsBackground: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of dosing frequency on adherence in severe chronic psychiatric and neurological diseases.Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted for articles in English from medical databases. Diseases were schizophrenia, psychosis, epilepsy, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder.Results: Of 1420 abstracts screened, 12 studies were included. Adherence measures included Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS®), medication possession ratio, medication persistence, and refill adherence. Three schizophrenia and one epilepsy study used MEMS, and all showed a trend towards higher adherence rates with less frequent dosing regimens. Three depression and one schizophrenia study used the medication possession ratio; the pooled odds ratio of being adherent was 89% higher (ie, 1.89, 95% credibility limits 1.71–2.09) on once-daily versus twice-daily dosing. Two studies in depression and one in all bupropion patients assessed medication persistence and refill adherence. The pooled odds ratio for the two depression studies using medication persistence was 2.10 (95% credibility limits 1.86–2.37) for once-daily versus twice-daily dosing. For refill adherence after 9 months, 65%–75% of patients on once-daily versus 56% on twice-daily dosing had at least one refill. In all but one of the studies using other measures of adherence, adherence rates were higher with once-daily dosing compared with more frequent dosing regimens. No relevant studies were identified for bipolar disorder or psychosis.Conclusion: Differences in study design and adherenc