PLoS ONE (Jan 2017)

Economic evaluation of the one-hour rule-out and rule-in algorithm for acute myocardial infarction using the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay in the emergency department.

  • Apoorva Ambavane,
  • Bertil Lindahl,
  • Evangelos Giannitsis,
  • Julie Roiz,
  • Joan Mendivil,
  • Lutz Frankenstein,
  • Richard Body,
  • Michael Christ,
  • Roland Bingisser,
  • Aitor Alquezar,
  • Christian Mueller,
  • TRAPID-AMI investigators

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187662
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 11
p. e0187662

Abstract

Read online

The 1-hour (h) algorithm triages patients presenting with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to the emergency department (ED) towards "rule-out," "rule-in," or "observation," depending on baseline and 1-h levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn). The economic consequences of applying the accelerated 1-h algorithm are unknown.We performed a post-hoc economic analysis in a large, diagnostic, multicenter study of hs-cTnT using central adjudication of the final diagnosis by two independent cardiologists. Length of stay (LoS), resource utilization (RU), and predicted diagnostic accuracy of the 1-h algorithm compared to standard of care (SoC) in the ED were estimated. The ED LoS, RU, and accuracy of the 1-h algorithm was compared to that achieved by the SoC at ED discharge. Expert opinion was sought to characterize clinical implementation of the 1-h algorithm, which required blood draws at ED presentation and 1h, after which "rule-in" patients were transferred for coronary angiography, "rule-out" patients underwent outpatient stress testing, and "observation" patients received SoC. Unit costs were for the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Germany. The sensitivity and specificity for the 1-h algorithm were 87% and 96%, respectively, compared to 69% and 98% for SoC. The mean ED LoS for the 1-h algorithm was 4.3h-it was 6.5h for SoC, which is a reduction of 33%. The 1-h algorithm was associated with reductions in RU, driven largely by the shorter LoS in the ED for patients with a diagnosis other than AMI. The estimated total costs per patient were £2,480 for the 1-h algorithm compared to £4,561 for SoC, a reduction of up to 46%.The analysis shows that the use of 1-h algorithm is associated with reduction in overall AMI diagnostic costs, provided it is carefully implemented in clinical practice. These results need to be prospectively validated in the future.