Isfahan University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Cardiac Rehabilitation Costs Publisher Pubmed



Moghei M1 ; Turkadawi K2 ; Isaranuwatchai W3 ; Sarrafzadegan N4, 5 ; Oh P6 ; Chessex C6 ; Grace SL1, 6
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. School of Kinesiology and Health Science, York University, Toronto, Canada
  2. 2. Department of Public Health, Qatar University, Al-Doha, Qatar
  3. 3. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
  4. 4. Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  5. 5. School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
  6. 6. University Health Network, University of Toronto, Canada

Source: International Journal of Cardiology Published:2017


Abstract

Background Despite the clinical benefits of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and its cost-effectiveness, it is not widely received. Arguably, capacity could be greatly increased if lower-cost models were implemented. The aims of this review were to describe: the costs associated with CR delivery, approaches to reduce these costs, and associated implications. Methods Upon finalizing the PICO statement, information scientists were enlisted to develop the search strategy of MEDLINE, Embase, CDSR, Google Scholar and Scopus. Citations identified were considered for inclusion by the first author. Extracted cost data were summarized in tabular format and qualitatively synthesized. Results There is wide variability in the cost of CR delivery around the world, and patients pay out-of-pocket for some or all of services in 55% of countries. Supervised CR costs in high-income countries ranged from PPP$294 (Purchasing Power Parity; 2016 United States Dollars) in the United Kingdom to PPP$12,409 in Italy, and in middle-income countries ranged from PPP$146 in Venezuela to PPP$1095 in Brazil. Costs relate to facilities, personnel, and session dose. Delivering CR using information and communication technology (mean cost PPP$753/patient/program), lowering the dose and using lower-cost personnel and equipment are important strategies to consider in containing costs, however few explicitly low-cost models are available in the literature. Conclusion More research is needed regarding the costs to deliver CR in community settings, the cost-effectiveness of CR in most countries, and the economic impact of return-to-work with CR participation. A low-cost model of CR should be standardized and tested for efficacy across multiple healthcare systems. © 2017 Elsevier B.V.
Other Related Docs
20. Preliminary Investigation of Economics Issues in Hospitalized Patients With Stroke, International Journal of Preventive Medicine (2013)