Cost effectiveness of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening and rescreening in men in a modern context:evaluation of a hypothetical cohort using a decision analytical model

Objective To assess the cost effectiveness of different screening strategies for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men, from the perspective of a national health service. Setting Screening units at regional hospitals. Participants Hypothetical cohort of 65 year old men from the general population. Main outcome measures Costs (£ in 2010) and effect on health outcomes (quality adjusted life years (QALYs)). Results Screening seems to be highly cost effective compared with not screening. The model estimated a 92% probability that some form of screening would be cost effective at a threshold of £20 000 (€24 790; $31 460). If men with an aortic diameter of 25-29 mm at the initial screening were rescreened once after five years, 452 men per 100 000 initially screened would benefit from early detection, whereas lifetime rescreening every five years would detect 794 men per 100 000. We estimated the associated incremental cost effectiveness ratios for rescreening once and lifetime rescreening to be £10 013 and £29 680 per QALY, respectively. The individual probability of being the most cost effective strategy was higher for each rescreening strategy than for the screening once strategy (in view of the £20 000 threshold). Conclusions This study confirms the cost effectiveness of screening versus no screening and lends further support to considerations of rescreening men at least once for abdominal aortic aneurysm

The RESCueH Programme: Testing New Non-Pharmacologic Interventions for Alcohol Use Disorders

Excessive alcohol consumption is one of the most important lifestyle factors affecting the disease burden in the Western world. The results of treatment in daily practice are modest at best. The aim of the RESCueH programme is to develop and evaluate methods, which are as practice-near as possible, and therefore can be implemented quickly and easily in everyday clinical practice. It is the first clinical alcohol programme to be transatlantic in scope, with implementation in treatment centers located in Denmark, Germany and the US. The RESCueH programme comprises 5 randomized controlled trials, and the studies can be expected to result in (1) more patients starting treatment in specialized outpatient clinics, (2) a greater number of elderly patients being treated, (3) increased patient motivation for treatment and thus improved adherence, (4) more patients with stable positive outcomes after treatment and (5) fewer patients relapsing into harmful drinking. The aim of this paper is to discuss the rationale for the RESCueH programme, to present the studies and expected results

Waist Circumference and Body Mass Index as Predictors of Health Care Costs

BACKGROUND: In the present study we analyze the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) and future health care costs. On the basis of the relation between these anthropometric measures and mortality, we hypothesized that for all levels of BMI increased WC implies added future health care costs (Hypothesis 1) and for given levels of WC increased BMI entails reduced future health care costs (Hypothesis 2). We furthermore assessed whether a combination of the two measures predicts health care costs better than either individual measure. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Data were obtained from the Danish prospective cohort study Diet, Cancer and Health. The population includes 15,334 men and 16,506 women 50 to 64 years old recruited in 1996 to 1997. The relationship between future health care costs and BMI and WC in combination was analyzed by use of categorized and continuous analyses. The analysis confirms Hypothesis 1, reflecting that an increased level of abdominal fat for a given BMI gives higher health care costs. Hypothesis 2, that BMI had a protective effect for a given WC, was only confirmed in the continuous analysis and for a subgroup of women (BMI<30 kg/m(2) and WC <88 cm). The relative magnitude of the estimates supports that the regressions including WC as an explanatory factor provide the best fit to the data. CONCLUSION: The study showed that WC for given levels of BMI predicts increased health costs, whereas BMI for given WC did not predict health costs except for a lower cost in non-obese women with normal WC. Combining WC and BMI does not give a better prediction of costs than WC alone

Something is Amiss in Denmark: A Comparison of Preventable Hospitalisations and Readmissions for Chronic Medical Conditions in the Danish Healthcare System and Kaiser Permanente

Background: As many other European healthcare systems the Danish healthcare system (DHS) has targeted chronic condition care in its reform efforts. Benchmarking is a valuable tool to identify areas for improvement. Prior work indicates that chronic care coordination is poor in the DHS, especially in comparison with care in Kaiser Permanente (KP), an integrated delivery system based in the United States. We investigated population rates of hospitalisation and readmission rates for ambulatory care sensitive, chronic medical conditions in the two systems. Methods: Using a historical cohort study design, age and gender adjusted population rates of hospitalisations for angina, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and hypertension, plus rates of 30-day readmission and mortality were investigated for all individuals aged 65+ in the DHS and KP. Results: DHS had substantially higher rates of hospitalisations, readmissions, and mean lengths of stay per hospitalisation, than KP had. For example, the adjusted angina hospitalisation rates in 2007 for the DHS and KP respectively were 1.01/100 persons (95%CI: 0.98-1.03) vs. 0.11/100 persons (95%CI: 0.10-0.13/100 persons); 21.6% vs. 9.9% readmission within 30 days (OR = 2.53; 95% CI: 1.84-3.47); and mean length of stay was 2.52 vs. 1.80 hospital days. Mortality up through 30 days post-discharge was not consistently different in the two systems. Conclusions: There are substantial differences between the DHS and KP in the rates of preventable hospitalisations and subsequent readmissions associated with chronic conditions, which suggest much opportunity for improvement within the Danish healthcare system. Reductions in hospitalisations also could improve patient welfare and free considerable resources for use towards preventing disease exacerbations. These conclusions may also apply for similar public systems such as the US Medicare system, the NHS and other systems striving to improve the integration of care for persons with chronic conditions

A retrospective analysis of health systems in Denmark and Kaiser Permanente

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To inform Danish health care reform efforts, we compared health care system inputs and performance and assessed the usefulness of these comparisons for informing policy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Retrospective analysis of secondary data in the Danish Health Care System (DHS) with 5.3 million citizens and the Kaiser Permanente integrated delivery system (KP) with 6.1 million members in California. We used secondary data to compare population characteristics, professional staff, delivery structure, utilisation and quality measures, and direct costs. We adjusted the cost data to increase comparability.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A higher percentage of KP patients had chronic conditions than did patients in the DHS: 6.3% vs. 2.8% (diabetes) and 19% vs. 8.5% (hypertension), respectively. KP had fewer total physicians and staff compared to DHS, with134 physicians/100,000 individuals versus 311 physicians/100,000 individuals. KP physicians are salaried employees; in contrast, DHS primary care physicians own and run their practices, remunerated by a mixture of capitation and fee-for-service payments, while most specialists are employed at largely public hospitals. Hospitalisation rates and lengths of stay (LOS) were lower in KP, with mean acute admission LOS of 3.9 days versus 6.0 days in the DHS, and, for stroke admissions, 4.2 days versus 23 days. Screening rates also differed: 93% of KP members with diabetes received retinal screening; only 46% of patients in the DHS with diabetes did. Per capita operating expenditures were PPP$1,951 (KP) and PPP$1,845 (DHS).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Compared to the DHS, KP had a population with more documented disease and higher operating costs, while employing fewer physicians and resources like hospital beds. Observed quality measures also appear higher in KP. However, simple comparisons between health care systems may have limited value without detailed information on mechanisms underlying differences or identifying translatable care improvement strategies. We suggest items for more in-depth analyses that could improve the interpretability of findings and help identify lessons that can be transferred.</p

The Viborg vascular (VIVA) screening trial of 65-74 year old men in the central region of Denmark: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) of men aged 65-74 years reduces the AAA-related mortality and is generally considered cost effective. Despite of this only a few national health care services have implemented permanent programs.</p> <p>Around 10% of men in this group have peripheral arterial disease (PAD) defined by an ankle brachial systolic blood pressure index (ABI) below 0.9 resulting in an increased mortality-rate of 25-30%. In addition well-documented health benefits may be achieved through primary prophylaxis by initiating systematic cholesterol-lowering, smoking cessation, low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (aspirins), exercise, a healthy diet and blood-pressure control altogether reducing the increased risks for cardiovascular disease by at least 20-25%.</p> <p>The benefits of combining screening for AAA and PAD seem evident; yet they remain to be established. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and the cost-effectiveness of a combined screening program for AAA, PAD and hypertension.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Viborg Vascular (VIVA) screening trial is a randomized, clinically controlled study designed to evaluate the benefits of vascular screening and modern vascular prophylaxis in a population of 50,000 men aged 65-74 years. Enrolment started October 2008 and is expected to stop in October 2010. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes are cardiovascular mortality, AAA-related mortality, hospital services related to cardiovascular conditions, prevalence of AAA, PAD and potentially undiagnosed hypertension, health-related quality of life and cost effectiveness. Data analysis by intention to treat.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Major follow-up will be performed at 3, 5 and 10 years and final study result after 15 years.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00662480</p