+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Relation between initial treatment strategy in stable coronary artery disease and 1-year costs in Ontario: a population-based cohort study

      , MD, , MPH, , MSc, , MD, , PhD, , MD, MSc, , MD, PhD
      CMAJ Open
      Joule Inc. or its licensors

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Cardiovascular disease is costly, and annual expenditures are projected to increase. Our objective was to examine the variation in patient-level costs and identify drivers of cost in patients with stable coronary artery disease.


          In this retrospective cohort study using administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, we identified all patients with stable coronary artery disease after index angiography between Oct. 1, 2008, and Sept. 30, 2011. We excluded patients with a myocardial infarction within 90 days before the index, with normal coronaries, or with mild coronary disease. We categorized hospitals into low, medium or high revascularization ratio centres. The primary outcome was cumulative 1-year health care costs. A hierarchical generalized linear model identified patient, physician and hospital characteristics associated with patient costs, with 2 main covariates of interest: treatment allocation (medical v. percutaneous coronary intervention v. coronary artery bypass grafting) and hospital revascularization ratio.


          A total of 183 630 angiography procedures were performed in Ontario during the study period. The final cohort included 39 126 patients with stable coronary artery disease, of which 15 138 received medical treatment and 23 988 received revascularization. The mean 1-year cost was $24 026 (interquartile range $8235-$30 511). The mean costs for medical management and revascularization were $18 069 and $27 786, respectively. The strongest predictor of costs was revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention: cost ratio 1.27, 95% CI [confidence interval] 1.24-1.31; coronary artery bypass grafting: cost ratio 2.62, 95% CI 2.53-2.71). Hospital revascularization ratio did not significantly affect costs. There was no significant interaction between treatment and revascularization ratio.


          Most health care costs were due to acute care hospital admissions, and costs were higher for patients undergoing revascularization than medical therapy. This study suggests that treatment decision has a substantial impact on health care resources.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          CMAJ Open
          CMAJ Open
          CMAJ Open
          Joule Inc. or its licensors
          08 August 2016
          Jul-Sep 2016
          : 4
          : 3
          : E409-E416
          Affiliations: Division of Cardiology (Kang, Bennell, Ko, Wijeysundera), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Schulich Heart Centre, University of Toronto; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Qiu, Austin, Ko, Wijeysundera), Toronto, Ont.; Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta (Knudtson), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (Austin, Ko, Wijeysundera), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
          Author notes
          Correspondence to: Harindra Wijeysundera, harindra.wijeysundera@ 123456sunnybrook.ca

          Competing interests: Harindra Wijeysundera reports grants from Edwards Lifesciences. No other competing interests were declared.

          Contributors: Jaskaran Kang and Maria Bennell contributed to the design of the study, and analysis and interpretation of data. Feng Qiu, Merril Knudtson, Peter Austin and Dennis Ko contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data. Harindra Wijeysundera contributed to the conception and design of the study, and analysis and interpretation of data. Jaskaran Kang drafted the article, which all of the other authors revised for important intellectual content. All of the authors gave final approval of the version to be published and agree to act as guarantors of the work.

          PMC5047799 PMC5047799 5047799 20150138
          Copyright 2016, Joule Inc. or its licensors
          Custom metadata


          Comment on this article