Article Text
Abstract
Aim: To assess the effect of changing clinical practice on the costs and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1998 and 2002.
Setting: Two tertiary interventional centres.
Patients: Consecutive patients undergoing PCI over a 12-month period between 1998 and 2002.
Design: Comparative observational study of costs and 12-month clinical outcomes of consecutive PCI procedures in 1998 (n = 1047) and 2002 (n = 1346). Clinical data were recorded in the Scottish PCI register. Repeat PCI, coronary artery bypass graft and mortality were obtained by record linkage. Costs of equipment were calculated using a computerised bar-code system and standard National Health Service reference costs.
Results: Between 1998 and 2002, the use of bare metal stents increased from 44% to 81%, and the use of glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibitors increased from 0% to 14% of cases. During this time, a significant reduction was observed in repeat target-vessel PCI (from 8.4% to 5.1%, p = 0.001), any repeat PCI (from 11.7% to 9.2%, p = 0.05) and any repeat revascularisation (from 15.1% to 11.3%, p = 0.009) within 12 months. Significantly higher cost per case in 2002 compared with 1998 (mean (standard deviation) £2311 (1158) v £1785 (907), p<0.001) was mainly due to increased contribution from bed-day costs in 2002 (45.0% (16.3%) v 26.2% (12.6%), p = 0.01) associated with non-elective cases spending significantly longer in hospital (6.22 (4.3) v 4.6 (4.3) days, p = 0.01).
Conclusions: Greater use of stents and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors between 1998 and 2002 has been accompanied by a marked reduction in the need for repeat revascularisation. Longer duration of hospital stay for non-elective cases is mainly responsible for increasing costs. Strategies to reduce the length of stay could considerably reduce the costs of PCI.
- BMS, bare metal stents
- CABG, coronary artery bypass graft
- PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Published Online First 18 July 2006
-
Funding: This study was funded by the Chief Scientists Office, Scottish Executive, UK
-
Competing interests: None.