The high cost of syncope: cost implications of a new insertable loop recorder in the investigation of recurrent syncope
Abstract
Background Patients with recurrent syncope frequently undergo extensive investigations that consume significant health care resources. Recent advances in long-term monitoring techniques have enhanced diagnostic yield in patients with infrequent symptoms. There is little information on the relative cost-effective profile of the investigative tools used in patients with syncope. Methods Two methods to determine health care costs in patients with syncope were used. In the first, health care resource utilization was determined in 24 patients with recurrent unexplained syncope and negative investigations who underwent insertion of the implantable loop recorder (ILR) during a pilot study of the feasibility of the device. The costs of investigations before, during, and after ILR implantation in each patient were calculated on the basis of median charges for an index investigation and a regression analysis of 1018 US Medicare hospital claims for syncope from 1993. Charges were converted to costs using a cost-to-charge ratio of 0.64. The second method was based on estimated costs per diagnosis and published diagnostic yields of 6 commonly applied tests in patients with syncope. A cohort simulation using theoretic models of 100 patients undergoing investigation for syncope was created to compare the diagnostic yield and cost per diagnosis of various diagnostic cascades. Results In the pilot study, the cost of investigation of syncope in the 2 years before ILR insertion was $7584 per pa…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
ILRs have been successfully used to study syncope and have a better cost/effectiveness ratio than conventional tests.
“ILRs have been successfully used to study syncope, in which they have shown a better cost/effectiveness ratio than the conventional tests, 86,87”
From Management of patients with palpitations: a position paper from the European Heart Rhythm Association (2011) · cites this paper as [86]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 35 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Krahn, A. D., Klein, G. J., Yee, R., & Mandab, V.
- Affiliations
- Western University (CA)
- Venue
- American Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-05
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 870-877
- ISSN
- 0002-8703 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2041770653
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 5.20
- 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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
- Keywords
- recurrent syncope, unexplained syncope, implantable loop recorder, health care costs, diagnostic yield, diagnostic cascade, long-term monitoring, echocardiography, electrophysiologic testing, structural heart disease, cost-effectiveness, cost-to-charge ratio, cohort simulation, healthcare resource utilization, treatment costs, external loop recorder
- MeSH terms
- Cost-Benefit Analysis, Echocardiography, Electrodes, Implanted, Electrophysiology, Follow-Up Studies, Medicare, Humans, Insurance Claim Review, Pilot Projects, Recurrence, Retrospective Studies, Syncope, United States, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory, Cost of Illness, Hospital Costs, Tilt-Table Test
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