Cited by 60Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHeart Failure Treatment and Management

Is ambulatory monitoring for “community-acquired” syncope economically attractive? A cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized trial of external loop recorders versus Holter monitoring

Rockx, Marie Antoinette, Hoch, Jeffrey S., Klein, George J., Yee, Raymond, Skanes, Allan C., Gula, Lorne J., Krahn, Andrew D.·2005·American Heart Journal

Abstract

Background Out patient ambulatory monitoring is often performed in patients with syncope that present in the primary care setting to include or exclude an arrhythmia. The cost-effectiveness of 2 monitoring strategies was assessed in a prospective randomized trial.Methods One hundred patients referred for ambulatory monitoring with syncope or presyncope were randomized to a 1-month external loop recorder (n = 49) or 48-hour Holter monitor (n = 51). Patients were offered crossover if there was failed activation or no symptom recurrence. The primary end point was symptom-rhythm correlation during monitoring. Direct costs were calculated based on the 2003 Ontario Health Insurance Plan fee schedule, combined with calculation of labor, materials, service, and overhead for diagnostic testing and related equipment.Results Before enrollment, the cost of all previous health care resource use was USD 472 +/- USD 397 (range USD 21-USD 1965). In the loop recorder group, 63% of patients had symptom recurrence and successful activation, compared with 24% in the Holter group (P < .0001). The cost per Holter was USD 177.64, and per loop recorder, USD 533.56, with a similar cost per diagnosis with the 2 techniques. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the loop recorder was USD 901.74 per extra successful diagnosis. A strategy of Holter followed by offered loop recorder trended toward lower cost than initial loop recorder followed by Holter (USD 481 +/- USD 267 vs USD 551 +/- USD 83, P = .08), but was associated with a lower overall diagnostic yield (49% vs 63%) and a resultant higher cost per diagnosis (USD 982 vs USD 871, P = .08). Bootstrapping suggested that 90% of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were less than USD 1250.Conclusion Despite the increased upfront cost of external loop recorders, the marked improvement in diagnostic yield offsets the cost. External loop recorders are an economically attractive alternative. First-line use of external loop recorders in patients with "community-acquired" syncope and presyncope should be considered to optimize diagnostic yield given its value.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.08.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In general, external loop recorders have a higher diagnostic yield than Holter monitoring.

    “In general, external loop recorders have a higher diagnostic yield than Holter monitoring. 162”
  • Holter monitoring in syncope is inexpensive in terms of set-up costs, but expensive in terms of cost per diagnosis.

    “Holter monitoring in syncope is inexpensive in terms of set-up costs, but expensive in terms of cost per diagnosis. 162”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 60

Authors
Rockx, M. A., Hoch, J. S., Klein, G. J., Yee, R., Skanes, A. C., Gula, L. J., & Krahn, A. D.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Krahn, Andrew D.
Venue
American Heart Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-11
Volume
150
Issue
5
Pages
1065.e1-1065.e5
ISSN
0002-8703 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974796957
Cited by
60
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
Keywords
syncope, presyncope, external loop recorder, Holter monitoring, cost-effectiveness, arrhythmia diagnosis, diagnostic yield, primary care
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Electrocardiography, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Syncope, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review