Cited by 100Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHeart Failure Treatment and Management

Cost-effectiveness of a specialized atrial fibrillation clinic vs. usual care in patients with atrial fibrillation

Open access
Hendriks, J., Tomini, F., van Asselt, T., Crijns, H., Vrijhoef, H.·2013·Europace

Abstract

AIMS: A recent randomized controlled trial demonstrated significant reductions in cardiovascular hospitalizations and deaths with a nurse-led integrated chronic care approach in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) compared with usual care. The aim of the present study is to assess cost-effectiveness of this nurse-led care programme vs. usual care. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken alongside the randomized controlled trial in which 712 patients were included at the Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands, and allocated to nurse-led care or usual care. Nurse-led care implied guideline-adherent management, steered by dedicated software, supervised by cardiologists. Usual care was regular outpatient care performed by cardiologists. A cost per life-year and a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) analysis was performed, both from a hospital perspective. The nurse-led care programme was associated with slightly more life-years and QALYs at a lower cost. Specifically, the nurse-led programme contributed to 0.009 QALY gains with a reduced cost of €1109 per patient and a gain of 0.02 life-years with a reduced cost of €735 per patient. Therefore, the nurse-led programme would be considered dominant. In fact, for all the possible values of willingness to pay for a QALY the nurse-led programme is considered to be more likely cost-effective than the care as usual. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness analysis in the present study demonstrated that a nurse-led integrated care approach will save costs and improve survival and quality of life, and is therefore a cost-effective management strategy for patients with AF.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/europace/eut055

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ 1997;6:327 -40.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hendriks, J., Tomini, F., van Asselt, T., Crijns, H., & Vrijhoef, H.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Hendriks, J.
Venue
Europace
Published
2013-03-20
Volume
15
Issue
8
Pages
1128-1135
ISSN
  • 1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2092
OpenAlex
W2096951525
Cited by
100
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • 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
atrial fibrillation, nurse-led care, cost-effectiveness, usual care, quality-adjusted life years, cardiovascular hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, hospital costs
MeSH terms
Aged, Atrial Fibrillation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Male, Netherlands, Quality of Life, Survival Rate, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Health Care Costs, Hospital Mortality, Delivery of Health Care, Integrated, Cardiovascular Nursing

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