Author
Listed:
- Suzanne J. Baron
(Massachusetts General Hospital
Baim Institute for Clinical Research)
- Serge Korjian
(Baim Institute for Clinical Research
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center)
- C. Michael Gibson
(Baim Institute for Clinical Research
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center)
- Matthew R. Reynolds
(Baim Institute for Clinical Research
Lahey Hospital and Medical Center)
Abstract
Background Studies have shown that up to 13% of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with low-risk chest pain receive further cardiac testing beyond an electrocardiogram and serial cardiac enzymes. The CADScor System is a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared device that uses ultra-sensitive phonocardiography to evaluate the risk of significant coronary artery disease (CAD). Objective To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of the CADScor system compared with other diagnostic modalities for the evaluation of low-risk chest pain in patients presenting to the ED in the USA. Methods A two-part economic model, consisting of a decision analytic tree followed by a short-term Markov model, was developed to compare 1-year costs and outcomes (e.g., quality-adjusted life year [QALY], false-negatives, and related cardiac events) associated with the CADScor System as the first-line test versus other noninvasive cardiac tests from the perspective of the US healthcare system (TreeAge Pro). Model inputs were derived from literature, and costs for treatment strategies were calculated from average US reimbursements associated with Current Procedural Terminology and Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group codes. Values were reported in 2023 US dollars (USD). Parameter uncertainty was assessed through a series of deterministic and one-way sensitivity analyses. Results Base case results demonstrated that a CADScor-First strategy was cost saving compared with other noninvasive cardiac tests without a substantial difference in adverse events. Economic results were consistent when coronary artery disease (CAD) prevalence rates were varied from 2 to 30% and across a variety of sensitivity analyses. The overall cost savings were estimated to be $7.3–15.3 million USD per 10,000 patients with low-risk chest pain. Conclusions Use of a CADScor-First strategy in the evaluation of patients with low-risk chest pain presenting to the ED may result in substantial cost savings for the US healthcare system. More research is needed to understand the long-term costs and outcomes of this strategy.
Suggested Citation
Suzanne J. Baron & Serge Korjian & C. Michael Gibson & Matthew R. Reynolds, 2025.
"Cost-Effectiveness of the CADScor System in Low-Risk Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Chest Pain,"
PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 805-814, September.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:9:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s41669-025-00590-2
DOI: 10.1007/s41669-025-00590-2
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:9:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s41669-025-00590-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.