Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
Cost of care for new versus recurrent acute coronary syndrome patients
Sharashchandra Shetty1, Rachel Halpern, Patrick L McCollam
1i3 Innovus, 12125 Technology Drive, MN002-0258, Eden Prairie, MN 55344, USA.
Insights
Newly diagnosed acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients incurred higher initial costs, while recurrent ACS patients faced significant ongoing medical expenses. Adherence to treatment guidelines is crucial for improving outcomes in both groups.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Health Economics
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) poses a significant and prolonged economic burden.
- Understanding cost differences between new and recurrent ACS cases is vital for resource allocation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the economic burden of ACS between new and recurrent patient cohorts.
- To identify predictors of cost in ACS patients.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of claims data from 15,508 US patients diagnosed with ACS between 2001 and 2003.
- Comparison of hospitalizations, revascularizations, and costs 1 year before and after the index ACS event.
- Multivariate regression analysis to determine cost predictors.
Main Results:
- New ACS patients had higher index event costs, while recurrent ACS patients experienced more re-hospitalizations and revascularizations.
- Adjusted annual follow-up medical costs were 9.9% higher for new ACS patients (p=0.017).
- Adjusted annual follow-up pharmacy costs were 8.3% higher for new ACS patients (p<0.0001).
Conclusions:
- Newly diagnosed ACS patients incur higher adjusted costs in the year post-index event.
- Recurrent ACS patients continue to face substantial medical costs.
- Enhanced adherence to treatment guidelines may improve patient outcomes and manage costs.
Introduction:
The economic burden of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) continues long after the acute event has resolved. This study compared ACS-related costs between new and recurrent ACS patients using retrospective claims data from a large US health plan.
Methods:
Patients with ACS were identified using ICD-9 codes between the 1st January 2001 and the 30th June 2003. The first diagnosis was defined as the index event. Patient claims were examined 1 year before, and up to 1 year after, the index event. Hospitalisations, revascularisations and costs for new and recurrent cohorts were compared. Multivariate regression was used to examine cost predictors.
Results:
In total, 15,508 patients were identified, 82% had new ACS. The new ACS cohort was more likely to have myocardial infarction and be hospitalised for the index event, leading to higher index event costs. However, the recurrent ACS cohort had more re-hospitalisations, longer lengths of inpatient stay and a higher probability of revascularisation during follow-up. The index event cost per patient and per patient-month was higher for new ACS patients. After adjusting for confounding factors, multivariate cost models revealed annualised follow-up medical costs were 9.9% higher (p=0.017) and annualised follow-up pharmacy costs were 8.3% higher (p< or =0.0001) for the new ACS cohort.
Conclusion:
Newly diagnosed ACS patients had significantly higher adjusted costs in the year following the index event, but recurrent ACS patients still experienced high medical costs. More emphasis by providers and patients on adherence to treatment guidelines may be one step to improving patient outcomes. *This paper was presented in part at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Annual Meeting, 7th April 2006.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Acute Coronary Syndrome II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
Acute Coronary Syndrome V: Nursing Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
