Abstract
Objective: To define the cost-effectiveness of screening ultrasound (US) and prophylactic inferior vena cava filters (VCF), approaches aimed at reducing the incidence of pulmonary embolus (PE) in high-risk trauma patients. Design: Cost-effective analysis. Materials and Methods: We constructed a decision tree with three approaches for PE prevention: no intervention, US, and VCF. Probabilities in each subtree were taken from published data. Sensitivity analyses evaluated all assumptions, probabilities, and outcomes for effects on baseline conclusions. Results: US is more cost-effective than VCF, with a cost/PE prevented of $46,300 compared with $93,700. The strategies become equally cost-effective only when VCF are placed in the radiology suite and length of stay is ≤ 2 weeks. Conclusions: US is the most cost-effective approach for PE prevention in high-risk trauma patients. VCF should be reserved for patients with an anticipated length of stay ≤ 2 weeks who can safely have a filter placed in the radiology suite.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 456-462 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 1997 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
Cite this
Cost-effective prevention of pulmonary embolus in high-risk trauma patients. / Brasel, Karen; Borgstrom, David C.; Weigelt, John A.
In: Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care, Vol. 42, No. 3, 03.1997, p. 456-462.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effective prevention of pulmonary embolus in high-risk trauma patients
AU - Brasel, Karen
AU - Borgstrom, David C.
AU - Weigelt, John A.
PY - 1997/3
Y1 - 1997/3
N2 - Objective: To define the cost-effectiveness of screening ultrasound (US) and prophylactic inferior vena cava filters (VCF), approaches aimed at reducing the incidence of pulmonary embolus (PE) in high-risk trauma patients. Design: Cost-effective analysis. Materials and Methods: We constructed a decision tree with three approaches for PE prevention: no intervention, US, and VCF. Probabilities in each subtree were taken from published data. Sensitivity analyses evaluated all assumptions, probabilities, and outcomes for effects on baseline conclusions. Results: US is more cost-effective than VCF, with a cost/PE prevented of $46,300 compared with $93,700. The strategies become equally cost-effective only when VCF are placed in the radiology suite and length of stay is ≤ 2 weeks. Conclusions: US is the most cost-effective approach for PE prevention in high-risk trauma patients. VCF should be reserved for patients with an anticipated length of stay ≤ 2 weeks who can safely have a filter placed in the radiology suite.
AB - Objective: To define the cost-effectiveness of screening ultrasound (US) and prophylactic inferior vena cava filters (VCF), approaches aimed at reducing the incidence of pulmonary embolus (PE) in high-risk trauma patients. Design: Cost-effective analysis. Materials and Methods: We constructed a decision tree with three approaches for PE prevention: no intervention, US, and VCF. Probabilities in each subtree were taken from published data. Sensitivity analyses evaluated all assumptions, probabilities, and outcomes for effects on baseline conclusions. Results: US is more cost-effective than VCF, with a cost/PE prevented of $46,300 compared with $93,700. The strategies become equally cost-effective only when VCF are placed in the radiology suite and length of stay is ≤ 2 weeks. Conclusions: US is the most cost-effective approach for PE prevention in high-risk trauma patients. VCF should be reserved for patients with an anticipated length of stay ≤ 2 weeks who can safely have a filter placed in the radiology suite.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030946634&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030946634&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/00005373-199703000-00013
DO - 10.1097/00005373-199703000-00013
M3 - Article
C2 - 9095113
AN - SCOPUS:0030946634
VL - 42
SP - 456
EP - 462
JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
SN - 2163-0755
IS - 3
ER -