Background Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home... Show moreBackground Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with a cost reduction. An accurate estimation of cost savings per patient treated at home is currently lacking.Aim The aim of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs during the first 3 months after a PE diagnosis in patients who are treated at home versus those who are initially hospitalized.Methods Patient-level data of the YEARS cohort study, including 383 normotensive patients diagnosed with PE, were used to estimate the proportion of patients treated at home, mean hospitalization duration in those who were hospitalized, and rates of PE-related readmissions and complications. To correct for baseline differences within the two groups, regression analyses was performed. The primary outcome was the average total health care costs during a 3-month follow-up period for patients initially treated at home or in hospital.Results Mean hospitalization duration for the initial treatment was 0.69 days for those treated initially at home (n = 181) and 4.3 days for those initially treated in hospital (n = 202). Total average costs per hospitalized patient were €3,209 and €1,512 per patient treated at home. The adjusted mean difference was €1,483 (95% confidence interval: €1,181–1,784).Conclusion Home treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE was associated with an estimated net cost reduction of €1,483 per patient. This difference underlines the advantage of triage-based home treatment of these patients. Show less
Hendriks, S.V.; Hout, W.B. van den; Bemmel, T. van; Bistervels, I.M.; Eijsvogel, M.; Faber, L.M.; ... ; YEARS Investigators 2021
Background Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home... Show moreBackground Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with a cost reduction. An accurate estimation of cost savings per patient treated at home is currently lacking.Aim The aim of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs during the first 3 months after a PE diagnosis in patients who are treated at home versus those who are initially hospitalized.Methods Patient-level data of the YEARS cohort study, including 383 normotensive patients diagnosed with PE, were used to estimate the proportion of patients treated at home, mean hospitalization duration in those who were hospitalized, and rates of PE-related readmissions and complications. To correct for baseline differences within the two groups, regression analyses was performed. The primary outcome was the average total health care costs during a 3-month follow-up period for patients initially treated at home or in hospital.Results Mean hospitalization duration for the initial treatment was 0.69 days for those treated initially at home ( n =181) and 4.3 days for those initially treated in hospital ( n =202). Total average costs per hospitalized patient were Euro3,209 and Euro1,512 per patient treated at home. The adjusted mean difference was Euro1,483 (95% confidence interval: Euro1,181-1,784).Conclusion Home treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE was associated with an estimated net cost reduction of Euro1,483 per patient. This difference underlines the advantage of triage-based home treatment of these patients. Show less
Background: Whereas accumulating studies on patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) report high incidences of thrombotic complications, large studies on clinically relevant thrombosis in... Show moreBackground: Whereas accumulating studies on patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) report high incidences of thrombotic complications, large studies on clinically relevant thrombosis in patients with other respiratory tract infections are lacking. How this high risk in COVID-19 patients compares to those observed in hospitalized patients with other viral pneumonias such as influenza is unknown.Objectives: To assess the incidence of venous and arterial thrombotic complications in hospitalized patients with influenza as opposed to that observed in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study; we used data from Statistics Netherlands (study period: 2018) on thrombotic complications in hospitalized patients with influenza. In parallel, we assessed the cumulative incidence of thrombotic complications-adjusted for competing risk of death-in patients with COVID-19 in three Dutch hospitals (February 24 to April 26, 2020).Results: Of the 13 217 hospitalized patients with influenza, 437 (3.3%) were diagnosed with thrombotic complications, versus 66 (11%) of the 579 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The 30-day cumulative incidence of any thrombotic complication in influenza was 11% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.4-12) versus 25% (95% CI, 18-32) in COVID-19. For venous thrombotic (VTC) complications and arterial thrombotic complications alone, these numbers were, respectively, 3.6% (95% CI, 2.7-4.6) and 7.5% (95% CI, 6.3-8.8) in influenza versus 23% (95% CI, 16-29) and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.9-8.8) in COVID-19.Conclusions: The incidence of thrombotic complications in hospitalized patients with influenza was lower than in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This difference was mainly driven by a high risk of VTC complications in the patients with COVID-19 admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. Remarkably, patients with influenza were more often diagnosed with arterial thrombotic complications. Show less
Hendriks, S.V.; Bavalia, R.; Bemmel, T. van; Bistervels, I.M.; Eijsvogel, M.; Faber, L.M.; ... ; YEARS Investigators 2020
Background: Studies have shown the safety of home treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) at low risk of adverse events. Management studies focusing on home treatment have suggested that... Show moreBackground: Studies have shown the safety of home treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) at low risk of adverse events. Management studies focusing on home treatment have suggested that 30% to 55% of acute PE patients could be treated at home, based on the HESTIA criteria, but data from day-to-day clinical practice are largely unavailable.Aim: To determine current practice patterns of home treatment of acute PE in the Netherlands.Method: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients who were discharged < 24 h and reasons for admission if treated in hospital. Further, we compared the 3-month incidence of PE-related unscheduled readmissions between patients treated at home and in hospital.Results: Of the 404 outpatients with PE included in this post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study, 184 (46%) were treated at home. The median duration of admission of the hospitalized patients was 3.0 days. The rate of PE related readmissions of patients treated at home was 9.7% versus 8.6% for hospitalized patients (crude hazard ratio 1.1 (95% CI 0.57-2.1)). The 3-month incidence of any adverse event was 3.8% in those treated at home (2 recurrent VTE, 3 major bleedings and two deaths) compared to 10% in the hospitalized patients (3 recurrent VTE, 6 major bleedings and fourteen deaths).Conclusions: In the YEARS study, 46% of patients with PE were treated at home with low incidence of adverse events. PE-related readmission rates were not different between patients treated at home or in hospital. Show less
Background The Hestia criteria can be used to select pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment. The subjective Hestia criterion "medical/social reason for admission" allows the... Show moreBackground The Hestia criteria can be used to select pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment. The subjective Hestia criterion "medical/social reason for admission" allows the treating physician to consider any patient-specific circumstances in the final management decision. It is unknown how often and why this criterion is scored. Methods This is a patient-level post hoc analysis of the combined Hestia and Vesta studies. The main outcomes were the frequency of all scored Hestia items in hospitalized patients and the explicit reason for scoring the subjective criterion. Hemodynamic parameters and computed tomography-assessed right ventricular (RV)/left ventricular (LV) ratio of those only awarded with the subjective criterion were compared with patients treated at home. Results From the 1,166 patients screened, data were available for all 600 who were hospitalized. Most were hospitalized to receive oxygen therapy (45%); 227 (38%) were only awarded with the subjective criterion, of whom 51 because of "intermediate to intermediate-high risk PE." Compared with patients with intermediate risk PE (RV/LV ratio > 1.0) treated at home (179/566, 32%), hospitalized patients with only the subjective criterion had a higher mean RV/LV ratio (mean difference +0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.41) and a higher heart rate (+18/min, 95% CI 10-25). No relevant differences were observed for other hemodynamic parameters. Conclusion The most frequent reason for hospital admission was oxygen therapy. In the decision to award the subjective criterion as sole argument for admission, the severity of the RV overload and resulting hemodynamic response of the patient was taken into account rather than just abnormal RV/LV ratio. Show less
