This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (29)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Paul F. M. M. van Bergen, MD, PhD; Jan J. C. Jonker, MD; Ben A. van Hout, PhD; Ronald T. van Domburg; Jaap W. Deckers, MD, PhD; Aida J. Azar, PhD; Albert Hofman, MD, PhD

JAMA. 1995;273(12):925-928.

Abstract
Objective.
—To investigate the costs and effects of long-term oral anticoagulant treatment after myocardial infarction.

Design.
—Cost-effectiveness analysis, based on a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting.
—Sixty Dutch hospitals.

Patients.
—A total of 3404 hospital survivors of acute myocardial infarction randomized within a median period of 4 days after discharge to either oral anticoagulant treatment or placebo. The mean follow-up was 37 months.

Intervention.
—Oral anticoagulant treatment aimed at a target international normalized ratio of 2.8 to 4.8.

Main Outcome Measurements.
—Costs of hospital stay during readmissions, costs related to major cardiologic interventions, and costs of oral anticoagulant treatment.

Results.
—The costs of oral anticoagulant treatment were estimated at 394 Dutch guilders (Dfl) per patient-year (Dfl1=US $0.58). Placebo patients stayed 18 830 days in the hospital compared with 15 083 days for anticoagulation patients. Average costs per patient of medical care during follow-up were estimated at Dfl 10784 for placebo patients and Dfl 9878 for anticoagulation patients.

Conclusions.
—Costs of long-term anticoagulant treatment are outweighed by the costs of prevented clinical events.

(JAMA. 1995;273:925-928)

Author Affiliations
From the ASPECT Coordinating Centre (Drs van Bergen and Jonker); Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University (Dr van Hout); Thoraxcentre, University Hospital Rotterdam (Drs Deckers and Azar and Mr van Domburg); and Erasmus University Medical School, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Drs van Bergen, Jonker, and Hofman), Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to Rotterdam Medical Research Foundation (ROMERES), Mathenesserlaan 247, 3021 HC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands (Dr van Bergen).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Renal Artery Stenosis: Cost-effectiveness of Diagnosis and Treatment
van Helvoort-Postulart et al.
Radiology 2007;244:505-513.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Economic factors associated with antithrombotic treatments for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation
Miller et al.
Eur Heart J Suppl 2005;7:C41-C54.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

State-of-the-Art Review : Secondary Prevention of Myocardial Infarction: Beneficial Effect of Combining Oral Anticoagulant Plus Aspirin: Therapy Based on Evidence
Altman et al.
CLIN APPL THROMB HEMOST 2000;6:126-134.
 

Cost-effectiveness of Warfarin and Aspirin for Prophylaxis of Stroke in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation
Gage et al.
JAMA 1995;274:1839-1845.
ABSTRACT  

Costs of Oral Anticoagulation Treatment After Myocardial Infarction
Bussey and Chiquette
JAMA 1995;274:1588-1589.
ABSTRACT  

Cardiovascular Disease
Gore and Dalen
JAMA 1995;273:1662-1664.
ABSTRACT  

Anticoagulation Reduces Costs and Time in Hospital After MI
Journal Watch Cardiology 1995;1995:18-18.
FULL TEXT  

ANTICOAGULATION SAVES COSTS AFTER MI
JWatch General 1995;1995:2-2.
FULL TEXT  

Economics and Efficacy in Choosing Oral Anticoagulants or Aspirin After Myocardial Infarction
Cairns and Markham
JAMA 1995;273:965-967.
ABSTRACT