0

The full content of Annals is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >
Articles |

Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Test Strategies for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease

Alan M. Garber, MD, PhD; and Neil A. Solomon, MD
[+] Article and Author Information

From Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, and Stanford University, Stanford, California; and Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California.


Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(9):719-728. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-130-9-199905040-00003
Text Size: A A A

Background: The appropriate roles for several diagnostic tests for coronary disease are uncertain.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative approaches to diagnosis of coronary disease.

Design: Meta-analysis of the accuracy of alternative diagnostic tests plus decision analysis to assess the health outcomes and costs of alternative diagnostic strategies for patients at intermediate pretest risk for coronary disease.

Data Sources: Studies of test accuracy that met inclusion criteria; published information on treatment effectiveness and disease prevalence.

Target Population: Men and women 45, 55, and 65 years of age with a 25% to 75% pretest risk for coronary disease.

Time Horizon: 30 years.

Perspective: Societal.

Interventions: Diagnostic strategies were initial angiography and initial testing with one of five noninvasive tests—exercise treadmill testing, planar thallium imaging, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), stress echocardiography, and positron emission tomography (PET)—followed by coronary angiography if noninvasive test results were positive. Testing was followed by observation, medical treatment, or revascularization.

Outcome Measures: Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and costs per QALY.

Results of Base-Case Analysis: Life expectancy varied little with the initial diagnostic test; for a 55-year-old man, the best-performing test increased life expectancy by 7 more days than the worst-performing test. More sensitive tests increased QALYs more. Echocardiography improved health outcomes and reduced costs relative to stress testing and planar thallium imaging. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $75 000/QALY for SPECT relative to echocardiography and was greater than $640 000 for PET relative to SPECT. Compared with SPECT, immediate angiography had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $94 000/QALY.

Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Qualitative findings varied little with age, sex, pretest probability of disease, or the test indeterminacy rate. Results varied most with sensitivity to severe coronary disease.

Conclusions: Echocardiography, SPECT, and immediate angiography are cost-effective alternatives to PET and other diagnostic approaches. Test selection should reflect local variation in test accuracy.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1.
Algorithm for initial management (top) and possible progression of health states (bottom) for patient at intermediate pretest risk for coronary disease.CABGPTCA

Initial testing with cardiac catheterization bypasses the noninvasive test point in the top panel. Treatment options include medical management, coronary artery bypass grafting ( ), and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty ( ).

Grahic Jump Location
Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2.
Cost-effectiveness of tests for coronary artery disease, in thousands of 1996 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), for men at 50% pretest risk for disease.

Echo = stress echocardiography; ETT = exercise electrocardiography; PET = positron emission tomography; SPECT = single-photon emission computed tomography.

Grahic Jump Location
Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3.
Cost-effectiveness of tests for coronary artery disease, in thousands of 1996 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), for women at 50% pretest risk for disease.

Echo = stress echocardiography; ETT = exercise electrocardiography; PET = positron emission tomography; SPECT = single-photon emission computed tomography.

Grahic Jump Location

Tables

References

Letters

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Comments

Submit a Comment
Submit a Comment

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

Toolkit

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Advertisement
Related Articles
Related Point of Care
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.
(Required)
(Required)