Rapid systematic review of readmissions costs after stroke.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation Pub Date : 2024-03-12 DOI:10.1186/s12962-024-00518-3
Pedro Abreu, Manuel Correia, Elsa Azevedo, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Rui Magalhães
{"title":"Rapid systematic review of readmissions costs after stroke.","authors":"Pedro Abreu, Manuel Correia, Elsa Azevedo, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Rui Magalhães","doi":"10.1186/s12962-024-00518-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stroke readmissions are considered a marker of health quality and may pose a burden to healthcare systems. However, information on the costs of post-stroke readmissions has not been systematically reviewed.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically review information about the costs of hospital readmissions of patients whose primary diagnosis in the index admission was a stroke.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A rapid systematic review was performed on studies reporting post-stroke readmission costs in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science up to June 2021. Relevant data were extracted and presented by readmission and stroke type. The original study's currency values were converted to 2021 US dollars based on the purchasing power parity for gross domestic product. The reporting quality of each of the included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four studies were identified. Considerable variability in readmission costs was observed among countries, readmissions, stroke types, and durations of the follow-up period. The UK and the USA were the countries reporting the highest readmission costs. In the first year of follow-up, stroke readmission costs accounted for 2.1-23.4%, of direct costs and 3.3-21% of total costs. Among the included studies, only one identified predictors of readmission costs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our review showed great variability in readmission costs, mainly due to differences in study design, countries and health services, follow-up duration, and reported readmission data. The results of this study can be used to inform policymakers and healthcare providers about the burden of stroke readmissions. Future studies should not solely focus on improving data standardization but should also prioritize the identification of stroke readmission cost predictors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47054,"journal":{"name":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10936094/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-024-00518-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Stroke readmissions are considered a marker of health quality and may pose a burden to healthcare systems. However, information on the costs of post-stroke readmissions has not been systematically reviewed.

Objectives: To systematically review information about the costs of hospital readmissions of patients whose primary diagnosis in the index admission was a stroke.

Methods: A rapid systematic review was performed on studies reporting post-stroke readmission costs in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science up to June 2021. Relevant data were extracted and presented by readmission and stroke type. The original study's currency values were converted to 2021 US dollars based on the purchasing power parity for gross domestic product. The reporting quality of each of the included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

Results: Forty-four studies were identified. Considerable variability in readmission costs was observed among countries, readmissions, stroke types, and durations of the follow-up period. The UK and the USA were the countries reporting the highest readmission costs. In the first year of follow-up, stroke readmission costs accounted for 2.1-23.4%, of direct costs and 3.3-21% of total costs. Among the included studies, only one identified predictors of readmission costs.

Conclusion: Our review showed great variability in readmission costs, mainly due to differences in study design, countries and health services, follow-up duration, and reported readmission data. The results of this study can be used to inform policymakers and healthcare providers about the burden of stroke readmissions. Future studies should not solely focus on improving data standardization but should also prioritize the identification of stroke readmission cost predictors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中风后再入院成本的快速系统性回顾。
背景:脑卒中再入院被认为是健康质量的标志,可能会对医疗系统造成负担。然而,有关脑卒中后再入院费用的信息尚未得到系统回顾:目的:系统回顾以脑卒中为主要入院诊断的患者再入院的成本信息:方法:对截至 2021 年 6 月 EMBASE、MEDLINE 和 Web of Science 中报告脑卒中后再住院费用的研究进行了快速系统综述。提取了相关数据,并按再入院和卒中类型进行了展示。根据国内生产总值的购买力平价,将原始研究的货币价值转换为 2021 年的美元。采用卫生经济评估综合报告标准(CHEERS)核对表对每项纳入研究的报告质量进行评估:结果:共确定了 44 项研究。再入院成本在不同国家、再入院情况、中风类型和随访时间长短之间存在很大差异。英国和美国是再入院费用最高的国家。在随访的第一年,中风再入院费用占直接费用的 2.1-23.4%,占总费用的 3.3-21%。在纳入的研究中,只有一项研究确定了再住院费用的预测因素:我们的综述显示,再入院成本存在很大差异,这主要是由于研究设计、国家和医疗服务、随访时间和报告的再入院数据存在差异。本研究的结果可用于告知政策制定者和医疗服务提供者有关卒中再入院的负担。未来的研究不应只关注提高数据标准化,还应优先识别卒中再入院成本的预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
59
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of cost-effectiveness analysis, including conceptual or methodological work, economic evaluations, and policy analysis related to resource allocation at a national or international level. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is aimed at health economists, health services researchers, and policy-makers with an interest in enhancing the flow and transfer of knowledge relating to efficiency in the health sector. Manuscripts are encouraged from researchers based in low- and middle-income countries, with a view to increasing the international economic evidence base for health.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of a new computerised decision support tool for identifying fetal compromise during monitored term labours: an early health economic model. Financial incentives in the management of diabetes: a systematic review. Economic evaluation of NALIRIFOX vs. nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine regimens for first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from U.S. perspective. The costs of implementing anaemia reduction interventions among women fish processors in Ghana. Global bibliometric analysis of cost effectiveness analysis in healthcare research from 2013 to 2023.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1