Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Should low-molecular-weight heparin be used in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes in rural hospitals?

0
Posted

Should low-molecular-weight heparin be used in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes in rural hospitals?

0

Doug G Manuel, Caroline A Knight, Muhammad Mamdani Objective: To evaluate the use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in a rural setting. Methods: A review of LMWH effectiveness and a simplified costing exercise that focused on potential differences between rural and urban settings for delivering LMWH versus unfractionated heparin (UFH). Results: LMWH is as clinically effective as UFH for the treatment of ACS in a rural setting. The estimated drug delivery cost of the dalteparin ($65 per admission) was less than that for UFH ($110). The high cost of after-hours activated partial thromboplastin time monitoring in a rural setting ($86 per admission) more than offset the increased cost of LMWH compared to UFH. Conclusions: LMWH is the heparin of choice for the treatment of ACS in a rural setting. The method of using an abbreviated effectiveness and costing exercise may be a practical approach for evaluating other health interventions in a rural settin

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.