Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis

Objectives We sought to establish the minimum level of clinical benefit attributable to the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry (VCOR) for the registry to be cost-effective.Design A modelled cost-effectiveness study of VCOR was conducted from the Australian healthcare system and societal perspective...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Danny Liew, Christopher M Reid, Dion Stub, Ella Zomer, Peter Lee, Angela L Brennan, Jeffrey Lefkovits, Diem T Dinh
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2023-04-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e066106.full
_version_ 1797839185985404928
author Danny Liew
Christopher M Reid
Dion Stub
Ella Zomer
Peter Lee
Angela L Brennan
Jeffrey Lefkovits
Diem T Dinh
author_facet Danny Liew
Christopher M Reid
Dion Stub
Ella Zomer
Peter Lee
Angela L Brennan
Jeffrey Lefkovits
Diem T Dinh
author_sort Danny Liew
collection DOAJ
description Objectives We sought to establish the minimum level of clinical benefit attributable to the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry (VCOR) for the registry to be cost-effective.Design A modelled cost-effectiveness study of VCOR was conducted from the Australian healthcare system and societal perspectives.Setting Observed deaths and costs attributed to coronary heart disease (CHD) over a 5-year period (2014–2018) were compared with deaths and costs arising from a hypothetical situation which assumed that VCOR did not exist. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and published sources were used to construct a decision analytic life table model to simulate the follow-up of Victorians aged ≥25 years for 5 years, or until death. The assumed contribution of VCOR to the proportional change in CHD mortality trend observed over the study period was varied to quantify the minimum level of clinical benefits required for the registry to be cost-effective. The marginal costs of VCOR operation and years of life saved (YoLS) were estimated.Primary outcome measures The return on investment (ROI) ratio and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).Results The minimum proportional change in CHD mortality attributed to VCOR required for the registry to be considered cost-effective was 0.125%. Assuming this clinical benefit, a net return of $A4.30 for every dollar invested in VCOR was estimated (ROI ratio over 5 years: 4.3 (95% CI 3.6 to 5.0)). The ICER estimated for VCOR was $A49 616 (95% CI $A42 228 to $A59 608) per YoLS. Sensitivity analyses found that the model was sensitive to the time horizon assumed and the extent of registry contribution to CHD mortality trends.Conclusions VCOR is likely cost-effective and represents a sound investment for the Victorian healthcare system. Our evaluation highlights the value of clinical quality registries in Australia.
first_indexed 2024-04-09T15:54:00Z
format Article
id doaj.art-6476a0a21acc4815844baaf2f2c9f454
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2044-6055
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-09T15:54:00Z
publishDate 2023-04-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open
spelling doaj.art-6476a0a21acc4815844baaf2f2c9f4542023-04-26T00:00:07ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552023-04-0113410.1136/bmjopen-2022-066106Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysisDanny Liew0Christopher M Reid1Dion Stub2Ella Zomer3Peter Lee4Angela L Brennan5Jeffrey Lefkovits6Diem T Dinh71 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia1 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia1 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaDepartment of Cardiology, Melbourne Health, Parkville, Victoria, AustraliaSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaObjectives We sought to establish the minimum level of clinical benefit attributable to the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry (VCOR) for the registry to be cost-effective.Design A modelled cost-effectiveness study of VCOR was conducted from the Australian healthcare system and societal perspectives.Setting Observed deaths and costs attributed to coronary heart disease (CHD) over a 5-year period (2014–2018) were compared with deaths and costs arising from a hypothetical situation which assumed that VCOR did not exist. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and published sources were used to construct a decision analytic life table model to simulate the follow-up of Victorians aged ≥25 years for 5 years, or until death. The assumed contribution of VCOR to the proportional change in CHD mortality trend observed over the study period was varied to quantify the minimum level of clinical benefits required for the registry to be cost-effective. The marginal costs of VCOR operation and years of life saved (YoLS) were estimated.Primary outcome measures The return on investment (ROI) ratio and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).Results The minimum proportional change in CHD mortality attributed to VCOR required for the registry to be considered cost-effective was 0.125%. Assuming this clinical benefit, a net return of $A4.30 for every dollar invested in VCOR was estimated (ROI ratio over 5 years: 4.3 (95% CI 3.6 to 5.0)). The ICER estimated for VCOR was $A49 616 (95% CI $A42 228 to $A59 608) per YoLS. Sensitivity analyses found that the model was sensitive to the time horizon assumed and the extent of registry contribution to CHD mortality trends.Conclusions VCOR is likely cost-effective and represents a sound investment for the Victorian healthcare system. Our evaluation highlights the value of clinical quality registries in Australia.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e066106.full
spellingShingle Danny Liew
Christopher M Reid
Dion Stub
Ella Zomer
Peter Lee
Angela L Brennan
Jeffrey Lefkovits
Diem T Dinh
Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
BMJ Open
title Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
title_full Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
title_fullStr Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
title_full_unstemmed Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
title_short Estimating the cost-effectiveness and return on investment of the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry in Australia: a minimum threshold analysis
title_sort estimating the cost effectiveness and return on investment of the victorian cardiac outcomes registry in australia a minimum threshold analysis
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e066106.full
work_keys_str_mv AT dannyliew estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT christophermreid estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT dionstub estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT ellazomer estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT peterlee estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT angelalbrennan estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT jeffreylefkovits estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis
AT diemtdinh estimatingthecosteffectivenessandreturnoninvestmentofthevictoriancardiacoutcomesregistryinaustraliaaminimumthresholdanalysis