Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden

Vasily Lukyanov,1 Purvee Parikh,2 Manish Wadhwa,2 Alexandria Dunn,2 Roderick van Leerdam,1 Johan Engdahl,3 Goran Medic1 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Chief Medical Office, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA; 3Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, SwedenC...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lukyanov V, Parikh P, Wadhwa M, Dunn A, van Leerdam R, Engdahl J, Medic G
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Dove Medical Press 2024-12-01
Series:Medical Devices: Evidence and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.dovepress.com/cost-minimization-model-in-cryptogenic-stroke-epatch-vs-implantable-lo-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-MDER
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850135469178748928
author Lukyanov V
Parikh P
Wadhwa M
Dunn A
van Leerdam R
Engdahl J
Medic G
author_facet Lukyanov V
Parikh P
Wadhwa M
Dunn A
van Leerdam R
Engdahl J
Medic G
author_sort Lukyanov V
collection DOAJ
description Vasily Lukyanov,1 Purvee Parikh,2 Manish Wadhwa,2 Alexandria Dunn,2 Roderick van Leerdam,1 Johan Engdahl,3 Goran Medic1 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Chief Medical Office, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA; 3Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, SwedenCorrespondence: Goran Medic, Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, High Tech Campus 52, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Tel +31-(0)6-18 19 37 82, Email goran.medic@philips.comBackground: Patients who have experienced a cryptogenic stroke (CS) may benefit from extended monitoring and possible earlier detection of atrial fibrillation (AF), allowing for the timely initiation of appropriate pharmacotherapy.Objective: This economic study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost outcomes of using mid-term cardiac monitors (referred to as “ePatch”) versus ILR-only in post-CS patients in the UK, Netherlands (NL) and Sweden.Methods: An existing cost-minimization model was modified to fit healthcare settings in the UK, Netherlands and Sweden. The model’s target population was composed of adult patients who had previously experienced a CS, but had no documented history of AF. The model compares the one-year direct medical costs between two groups: one group receiving wearable ePatch, the other group proceeding directly to ILR.Results: When applied to a group of 1,000 patients, the ePatch versus ILR approach resulted in cost savings, due to combination of reduced expenses and decreased modelled occurrence of recurrent strokes in all three countries studied. In the base case analysis, the cost savings per patient with detected AF for ePatch ranged from 3.4– 6.0 times, depending on the country.Conclusion: Utilizing ePatch extended wear Holter for mid-term ECG monitoring in CS patients represents a cost-saving alternative to monitoring with ILR. The cost savings were achieved by reducing device expenses and by prevention of recurrent strokes via earlier anticoagulation initiation. Preventing recurrent strokes in this population is highly significant, as it can lead to improved long-term health outcomes and reduced overall healthcare costs.Keywords: outpatient cardiac monitoring, stroke, holter, atrial fibrillation, electrocardiography, economic evaluation, secondary prevention, telemedicine, remote monitoring
format Article
id doaj-art-08d920c8e8e043d4bdd23c8b19efa4bc
institution OA Journals
issn 1179-1470
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format Article
series Medical Devices: Evidence and Research
spelling doaj-art-08d920c8e8e043d4bdd23c8b19efa4bc2025-08-20T02:31:24ZengDove Medical PressMedical Devices: Evidence and Research1179-14702024-12-01Volume 1747149097997Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and SwedenLukyanov VParikh PWadhwa MDunn Avan Leerdam REngdahl JMedic GVasily Lukyanov,1 Purvee Parikh,2 Manish Wadhwa,2 Alexandria Dunn,2 Roderick van Leerdam,1 Johan Engdahl,3 Goran Medic1 1Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, Eindhoven, Netherlands; 2Chief Medical Office, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA; 3Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, SwedenCorrespondence: Goran Medic, Chief Medical Office, Philips Healthcare, High Tech Campus 52, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Tel +31-(0)6-18 19 37 82, Email goran.medic@philips.comBackground: Patients who have experienced a cryptogenic stroke (CS) may benefit from extended monitoring and possible earlier detection of atrial fibrillation (AF), allowing for the timely initiation of appropriate pharmacotherapy.Objective: This economic study aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost outcomes of using mid-term cardiac monitors (referred to as “ePatch”) versus ILR-only in post-CS patients in the UK, Netherlands (NL) and Sweden.Methods: An existing cost-minimization model was modified to fit healthcare settings in the UK, Netherlands and Sweden. The model’s target population was composed of adult patients who had previously experienced a CS, but had no documented history of AF. The model compares the one-year direct medical costs between two groups: one group receiving wearable ePatch, the other group proceeding directly to ILR.Results: When applied to a group of 1,000 patients, the ePatch versus ILR approach resulted in cost savings, due to combination of reduced expenses and decreased modelled occurrence of recurrent strokes in all three countries studied. In the base case analysis, the cost savings per patient with detected AF for ePatch ranged from 3.4– 6.0 times, depending on the country.Conclusion: Utilizing ePatch extended wear Holter for mid-term ECG monitoring in CS patients represents a cost-saving alternative to monitoring with ILR. The cost savings were achieved by reducing device expenses and by prevention of recurrent strokes via earlier anticoagulation initiation. Preventing recurrent strokes in this population is highly significant, as it can lead to improved long-term health outcomes and reduced overall healthcare costs.Keywords: outpatient cardiac monitoring, stroke, holter, atrial fibrillation, electrocardiography, economic evaluation, secondary prevention, telemedicine, remote monitoringhttps://www.dovepress.com/cost-minimization-model-in-cryptogenic-stroke-epatch-vs-implantable-lo-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-MDERoutpatient cardiac monitoringstrokeholteratrial fibrillationelectrocardiographyeconomic evaluationsecondary preventiontelemedicineremote monitoring
spellingShingle Lukyanov V
Parikh P
Wadhwa M
Dunn A
van Leerdam R
Engdahl J
Medic G
Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
Medical Devices: Evidence and Research
outpatient cardiac monitoring
stroke
holter
atrial fibrillation
electrocardiography
economic evaluation
secondary prevention
telemedicine
remote monitoring
title Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
title_full Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
title_fullStr Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
title_full_unstemmed Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
title_short Cost-Minimization Model in Cryptogenic Stroke: ePatch vs Implantable Loop Recorder in Patients from the UK, Netherlands, and Sweden
title_sort cost minimization model in cryptogenic stroke epatch vs implantable loop recorder in patients from the uk netherlands and sweden
topic outpatient cardiac monitoring
stroke
holter
atrial fibrillation
electrocardiography
economic evaluation
secondary prevention
telemedicine
remote monitoring
url https://www.dovepress.com/cost-minimization-model-in-cryptogenic-stroke-epatch-vs-implantable-lo-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-MDER
work_keys_str_mv AT lukyanovv costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT parikhp costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT wadhwam costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT dunna costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT vanleerdamr costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT engdahlj costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden
AT medicg costminimizationmodelincryptogenicstrokeepatchvsimplantablelooprecorderinpatientsfromtheuknetherlandsandsweden