IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i7p2334-d338963.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness Analysis and Payment Policy Recommendation—Population-Based Survey with Big Data Methodology for Readmission Prevention of Patients with Paroxysmal Supraventricular Tachycardia treated with Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation

Author

Listed:
  • Chien-Lung Chan

    (Department of Information Management, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan
    Innovation Center for Big Data and Digital Convergence, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan)

  • Ai-Hsien Adams Li

    (Division of Cardiology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei 220, Taiwan)

  • Hsiang-An Chung

    (Department of Information Management, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan)

  • Dinh-Van Phan

    (Department of Information Management, Yuan Ze University, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan
    Statistics and Informatics Department, University of Economics, The University of Danang, Danang 550000, Vietnam
    Teaching and Research Team for Business Intelligence, University of Economics, The University of Danang, Danang 550000, Vietnam)

Abstract

Recurrence of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT) has been reported to be lower in patients treated with radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) than in those who are not. Few population-based surveys have stated the cost-effectiveness related to this treatment. We, therefore, performed a nationwide retrospective study using National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) data from 2001–2012 in Taiwan. The incidence of PSVT-related admissions was computed from patients’ first admission for a primary PSVT diagnosis. There were 21,086 patients hospitalized due to first-time PSVT, of whom 13,075 underwent RFCA, with 374 recurrences (2.86%). In contrast, 1751 (21.86%) of the remaining 8011 patients who did not receive RFCA, most of whom had financial concerns, experienced PSVT recurrence. The relative PSVT recurrence risk in those who did not receive RFCA was 7.6 times (95% CI: 6.67–8.33) that of those who did undergo RFCA. In conclusion, the PSVT recurrence rate was much higher in patients who did not receive RFCA at their first admission. Furthermore, RFCA proved cost-effective, with the ratio of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and gross domestic product (GDP) being only 1.15. To prevent readmission and avoid incremental cost, the authority could provide a financial supplement for every patient so that the procedure is performed, reducing the PSVT-recurrence life-years (disease-specific DALY).

Suggested Citation

  • Chien-Lung Chan & Ai-Hsien Adams Li & Hsiang-An Chung & Dinh-Van Phan, 2020. "Cost Effectiveness Analysis and Payment Policy Recommendation—Population-Based Survey with Big Data Methodology for Readmission Prevention of Patients with Paroxysmal Supraventricular Tachycardia trea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2334-:d:338963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2334/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2334/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannesson, Magnus & Weinstein, Milton C., 1993. "On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 459-467, December.
    2. Yun Gi Kim & Jaemin Shim & Jong-Il Choi & Young-Hoon Kim, 2016. "Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation Improves the Quality of Life Measured with a Short Form-36 Questionnaire in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chien-Lung Chan & Chi-Chang Chang, 2020. "Big Data, Decision Models, and Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-7, September.
    2. Chien-Lung Chan & Chi-Chang Chang, 2022. "Big Data, Decision Models, and Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-9, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gary Becker & Kevin Murphy & Tomas Philipson, 2007. "The Value of Life Near its End and Terminal Care," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001428, David K. Levine.
    2. Tom L. Drake & Yoel Lubell & Shwe Sin Kyaw & Angela Devine & Myat Phone Kyaw & Nicholas P. J. Day & Frank M. Smithuis & Lisa J. White, 2017. "Geographic Resource Allocation Based on Cost Effectiveness: An Application to Malaria Policy," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 299-306, June.
    3. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero, 2008. "Opportunity analysis of newborn screening programs," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 12(4), pages 259-277, December.
    4. McKenna, Claire & Chalabi, Zaid & Epstein, David & Claxton, Karl, 2010. "Budgetary policies and available actions: A generalisation of decision rules for allocation and research decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 170-181, January.
    5. J. Brown & N. J. Welton & C. Bankhead & S. H. Richards & L. Roberts & C. Tydeman & T. J. Peters, 2006. "A Bayesian approach to analysing the cost‐effectiveness of two primary care interventions aimed at improving attendance for breast screening," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 435-445, May.
    6. Philipson Tomas J & Jena Anupam B, 2006. "Who Benefits from New Medical Technologies? Estimates of Consumer and Producer Surpluses for HIV/AIDS Drugs," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-33, January.
    7. Birch, Stephen & Gafni, Amiram, 2003. "Economics and the evaluation of health care programmes: generalisability of methods and implications for generalisability of results," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 207-219, May.
    8. Morton, Alec, 2014. "Aversion to health inequalities in healthcare prioritisation: A multicriteria optimisation perspective," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 164-173.
    9. Hultkrantz, Lars & Svensson, Mikael, 2012. "A Comparison of Benefit Cost and Cost Utility Analysis in Practice: Divergent Policies in Sweden," Working Papers 2012:5, Örebro University, School of Business.
    10. Hoel, Michael, 2007. "What should (public) health insurance cover?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 251-262, March.
    11. Liqun Liu & Andrew J. Rettenmaier & Thomas R. Saving, 2008. "Longevity bias in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(4), pages 523-534, April.
    12. Elamin H. Elbasha & Mark L. Messonnier, 2004. "Cost‐effectiveness analysis and health care resource allocation: decision rules under variable returns to scale," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(1), pages 21-35, January.
    13. Laura McCullagh & Cathal Walsh & Michael Barry, 2012. "Value-of-Information Analysis to Reduce Decision Uncertainty Associated with the Choice of Thromboprophylaxis after Total Hip Replacement in the Irish Healthcare Setting," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(10), pages 941-959, October.
    14. Mark Sculpher & David Torgerson & Ron Goeree & Bernie O'Brien, 1999. "A critical structured review of economic evaluations of interventions for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis," Working Papers 169chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    15. Tomas J. Philipson & Gary Becker & Dana Goldman & Kevin M. Murphy, 2010. "Terminal Care and The Value of Life Near Its End," NBER Working Papers 15649, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Hoel, Michael, 2009. "Efficient use of health care resources: The interaction between improved health and reduced health related income loss," HERO Online Working Paper Series 2001:9, University of Oslo, Health Economics Research Programme.
    17. Juan D. Moreno-Ternero & Carmen Herrero, 2005. "A new outcome measure for cost-utility analyses of screening programs," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 9(7), pages 1-8.
    18. Lindholm, Lars & Hallgren, C. -G. & Boman, Kurt & Markgren, Kenth & Weinehall, Lars & Ogren, J. -E., 1999. "Cost-effectiveness analysis with defined budget: how to distribute resources for the prevention of cardiovascular disease?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 155-170, August.
    19. Fleurence, Rachael L. & Torgerson, David J., 2004. "Setting priorities for research," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-10, July.
    20. J.- Graf v. d. Schulenburg & Christoph Vauth & Thomas Mittendorf & Wolfgang Greiner, 2007. "Methods for determining cost-benefit ratios for pharmaceuticals in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(1), pages 5-31, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2334-:d:338963. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.