Health Technology Assessment

Systematic review and cost effectiveness evaluation of 'pill-in-the-pocket' strategy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation compared to episodic in-hospital treatment or continuous antiarrhythmic drug therapy

  • Type:
    Extended Research Article Our publication formats
  • Headline:
    Study found that a pill-in-the-pocket (PiP) strategy seems to be slightly less effective than antiarrhythmic drug therapy and in-hospital treatment but is associated with cost savings. A change in clinical practice that includes the introduction of PiP may save costs but also involves a reduction in clinical effectiveness compared to existing approaches used to treat patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF); however, there is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation for the use of PiP strategy in patients with PAF
  • Authors:
    C Martin Saborido,
    J Hockenhull,
    A Bagust,
    A Boland,
    R Dickson,
    D Todd
    Detailed Author information

    C Martin Saborido1, J Hockenhull1, A Bagust1, A Boland1, R Dickson1,*, D Todd2

    • 1 Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Liverpool, UK
    • 2 Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
    • * Corresponding author
  • Funding:
    Health Technology Assessment programme
  • Journal:
  • Issue:
    Volume: 14, Issue: 31
  • Published:
  • Citation:
    HTA Technology Assessment Report. Martin Saborido C, Hockenhull J, Bagust A, Boland A, Dickson R, Todd D. Volume 14, number 31. Published June 2010. Systematic review and cost-effectiveness evaluation of ‘pill-in-the-pocket’ strategy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation compared to episodic in-hospital treatment or continuous antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Health Technol Assess 2010;14(31). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta14310
  • DOI:
Crossmark status check