hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Hospital utilization and costs for spinal cord stimulation compared with enhanced external counterpulsation for refractory angina pectoris
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society, Avdelningen för Hälsovetenskap.
Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University.
Department of Health Sciences Lund, Lund University.
2013 (English)In: Journal of Evaluation In Clinical Practice, ISSN 1356-1294, E-ISSN 1365-2753, Vol. 19, no 1, 139-147 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Rationale, aims and objectives  The aim of this study was to compare acute hospital utilization and costs for patients with refractory angina pectoris undergoing spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP). Method  Seventy-three persons were included in this register study. The acute hospital utilization and costs for SCS and EECP were followed over a period from 12 months before treatment to 24 months after treatment using Patient Administrative Support in Skåne for publicly organized care. Results  SCS was significantly more expensive than EECP (P < 0.001). Both SCS and EECP entailed fewer days of hospitalization for coronary artery disease in the 12-month follow-up compared with the 12 months preceding treatment. Patients treated with EECP showed an association between reduced hospital admissions and an improved Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification class compared with 1 year before treatment. A significant reduction in cost was seen in both the SCS group (P = 0.018 and P = 0.001, respectively) and the EECP group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.045, respectively) during 12 and 24 months of follow-up compared with before treatment. There were no significant differences between the groups for hospitalization days or admissions, including costs, at the different follow-ups. Conclusions  Cost-effective treatment modalities such as SCS and EECP are valuable additions to medical and revascularization therapy in patients with refractory angina pectoris. Pre-existing conditions and the patient's preferences should be taken in consideration when clinicians choose between treatments for this group of patients.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 19, no 1, 139-147 p.
Keyword [en]
enhanced external counterpulsation, hospital utilization, refractory angina pectoris, spinal cord stimulation
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-10158DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01784.xPubMedID: 22040457OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-10158DiVA: diva2:603789
Available from: 2013-02-06 Created: 2013-02-06 Last updated: 2013-02-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Avdelningen för Hälsovetenskap
In the same journal
Journal of Evaluation In Clinical Practice
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 46 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf