The Cardiac Care Bridge transitional care program for the management of older high-risk cardiac patients: An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse-led transitional care program in older (≥70 years) cardiac patients compared to usual care. Methods The intervention group (n = 153) received the CCB program consisting of case management, disease management and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the transition from hospital to home on top of usual care and was compared with the usual care group (n = 153). Outcomes included a composite measure of first all-cause unplanned hospital readmission or mortality, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and societal costs within six months follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated by using bootstrapped seemingly unrelated regression. Results No significant between group differences in the composite outcome of readmission or mortality nor in societal costs were observed. QALYs were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, mean difference -0.03 (95% CI: -0.07; -0.02). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.31 at a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of €0,00 and 0.14 at a WTP of €50,000 per composite outcome prevented and 0.32 and 0.21, respectively per QALY gained. Conclusion The CCB program was on average more expensive and less effective compared to usual care, indicating that the CCB program is dominated by usual care. Therefore, the CCB program cannot be considered cost-effective compared to usual care

The Cardiac Care Bridge transitional care program for the management of older highrisk cardiac patients: An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse-led transitional care program in older (≥70 years) cardiac patients compared to usual care. Methods The intervention group (n = 153) received the CCB program consisting of case management, disease management and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the transition from hospital to home on top of usual care and was compared with the usual care group (n = 153). Outcomes included a composite measure of first all-cause unplanned hospital readmission or mortality, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and societal costs within six months follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated by using bootstrapped seemingly unrelated regression. Results No significant between group differences in the composite outcome of readmission or mortality nor in societal costs were observed. QALYs were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, mean difference -0.03 (95% CI: -0.07; -0.02). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.31 at a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of €0,00 and 0.14 at a WTP of €50,000 per composite outcome prevented and 0.32 and 0.21, respectively per QALY gained. Conclusion The CCB program was on average more expensive and less effective compared to usual care, indicating that the CCB program is dominated by usual care. Therefore, the CCB program cannot be considered cost-effective compared to usual care

The Cardiac Care Bridge transitional care program for the management of older high-risk cardiac patients: An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse-led transitional care program in older (≥70 years) cardiac patients compared to usual care. METHODS: The intervention group (n = 153) received the CCB program consisting of case management, disease management and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the transition from hospital to home on top of usual care and was compared with the usual care group (n = 153). Outcomes included a composite measure of first all-cause unplanned hospital readmission or mortality, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and societal costs within six months follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated by using bootstrapped seemingly unrelated regression. RESULTS: No significant between group differences in the composite outcome of readmission or mortality nor in societal costs were observed. QALYs were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, mean difference -0.03 (95% CI: -0.07; -0.02). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.31 at a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of €0,00 and 0.14 at a WTP of €50,000 per composite outcome prevented and 0.32 and 0.21, respectively per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: The CCB program was on average more expensive and less effective compared to usual care, indicating that the CCB program is dominated by usual care. Therefore, the CCB program cannot be considered cost-effective compared to usual care

The Cardiac Care Bridge transitional care program for the management of older highrisk cardiac patients: An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse-led transitional care program in older (≥70 years) cardiac patients compared to usual care. Methods The intervention group (n = 153) received the CCB program consisting of case management, disease management and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the transition from hospital to home on top of usual care and was compared with the usual care group (n = 153). Outcomes included a composite measure of first all-cause unplanned hospital readmission or mortality, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and societal costs within six months follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated by using bootstrapped seemingly unrelated regression. Results No significant between group differences in the composite outcome of readmission or mortality nor in societal costs were observed. QALYs were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, mean difference -0.03 (95% CI: -0.07; -0.02). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.31 at a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of €0,00 and 0.14 at a WTP of €50,000 per composite outcome prevented and 0.32 and 0.21, respectively per QALY gained. Conclusion The CCB program was on average more expensive and less effective compared to usual care, indicating that the CCB program is dominated by usual care. Therefore, the CCB program cannot be considered cost-effective compared to usual care

Impact of genetic ancestry and sociodemographic status on the clinical expression of systemic lupus erythematosus in American Indian-European populations

Objective American Indian-Europeans, Asians, and African Americans have an excess morbidity from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and a higher prevalence of lupus nephritis than do Caucasians. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between genetic ancestry and sociodemographic characteristics and clinical features in a large cohort of American Indian-European SLE patients. Methods A total of 2,116 SLE patients of American Indian-European origin and 4,001 SLE patients of European descent for whom we had clinical data were included in the study. Genotyping of 253 continental ancestry-informative markers was performed on the Illumina platform. Structure and Admixture software were used to determine genetic ancestry proportions of each individual. Logistic regression was used to test the association between genetic ancestry and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results The average American Indian genetic ancestry of 2,116 SLE patients was 40.7%. American Indian genetic ancestry conferred increased risks of renal involvement (P less than 0.0001, OR 3.50 [95% CI 2.63- 4.63]) and early age at onset (P less than 0.0001). American Indian ancestry protected against photosensitivity (P less than 0.0001, OR 0.58 [95% CI 0.44-0.76]), oral ulcers (P less than 0.0001, OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.42-0.72]), and serositis (P less than 0.0001, OR 0.56 [95% CI 0.41-0.75]) after adjustment for age, sex, and age at onset. However, age and sex had stronger effects than genetic ancestry on malar rash, discoid rash, arthritis, and neurologic involvement. Conclusion In general, American Indian genetic ancestry correlates with lower sociodemographic status and increases the risk of developing renal involvement and SLE at an earlier age. Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology

Impact of genetic ancestry and sociodemographic status on the clinical expression of systemic lupus erythematosus in American Indian-European populations

Artículo de publicación ISIObjective American Indian-Europeans, Asians, and African Americans have an excess morbidity from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and a higher prevalence of lupus nephritis than do Caucasians. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between genetic ancestry and sociodemographic characteristics and clinical features in a large cohort of American Indian-European SLE patients. Methods A total of 2,116 SLE patients of American Indian-European origin and 4,001 SLE patients of European descent for whom we had clinical data were included in the study. Genotyping of 253 continental ancestry-informative markers was performed on the Illumina platform. Structure and Admixture software were used to determine genetic ancestry proportions of each individual. Logistic regression was used to test the association between genetic ancestry and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results The average American Indian genetic ancestry of 2,116 SLE patients was 40.7%. American Indian genetic ancestry conferred increased risks of renal involvement (P < 0.0001, OR 3.50 [95% CI 2.63- 4.63]) and early age at onset (P < 0.0001). American Indian ancestry protected against photosensitivity (P < 0.0001, OR 0.58 [95% CI 0.44-0.76]), oral ulcers (P < 0.0001, OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.42-0.72]), and serositis (P < 0.0001, OR 0.56 [95% CI 0.41-0.75]) after adjustment for age, sex, and age at onset. However, age and sex had stronger effects than genetic ancestry on malar rash, discoid rash, arthritis, and neurologic involvement. Conclusion In general, American Indian genetic ancestry correlates with lower sociodemographic status and increases the risk of developing renal involvement and SLE at an earlier age.NIH P01-AR-49084 P60-AR-053308 R01-AR-052300 R21-AI-070304 K24-AR-002138 P60 2-AR-30692 UL1-RR-025741 P30-AR-053483 P30-RR-031152 P01-AI-083194 AR-43727 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant AR-058621 Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) grant 8 P20-GM-103456-09 National Center for Research Resources UL1-RR-025005 Alliance for Lupus Research Kirkland Scholar Award Federico Wilhelm Agricola Foundatio