Cost-Effectiveness of Loop Recorders vs Holter Monitors for Syncope
Author Information
Author(s): Jeffrey S Hoch, Marie Antoinette Rockx, Andrew D Krahn
Primary Institution: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Hypothesis
Can the net benefit regression framework be used to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for ambulatory monitoring of syncope?
Conclusion
The net benefit regression framework is effective for constructing cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, indicating that loop recorders may be cost-effective compared to Holter monitors.
Supporting Evidence
- Loop recorders had a higher success rate in diagnosing symptoms compared to Holter monitors.
- The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for loop recorders was $1,096 per additional successful diagnosis.
- The study used a sample size of 100 patients to compare the two monitoring methods.
Takeaway
This study looked at two types of heart monitors to see which one is better for patients who faint. It found that one type, the loop recorder, works better even though it costs more.
Methodology
Patients were randomized to receive either a loop recorder or a Holter monitor, and costs and outcomes were analyzed to determine cost-effectiveness.
Limitations
The study's findings may not be generalizable due to the specific patient population and the cost data being based on a single health insurance plan.
Participant Demographics
Patients referred for ambulatory monitoring with syncope or presyncope.
Statistical Information
P-Value
<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website