The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of dual chamber pacing compared to single pacing for bradycardia - NICE TechnologyAssessment Report

Castelnuovo L, Stein K, Pitt M, Garside R, Payne E
Record ID 32005001014
Authors' objectives:

To estimate the effectiveness and costeffectiveness of dual-chamber pacemakers versus single-chamber atrial or single-chamber ventricular pacemakers in the treatment of bradycardia due to sick sinus syndrome (SSS) or atrioventricular block (AVB).

Authors' recommendations: Dual-chamber pacing results in small but potentially important benefits in populations with SSS and/or AVB compared with ventricular pacemakers. Pacemaker syndrome is a crucial factor in determining cost-effectiveness; however, difficulties in standardising diagnosis and measurement of severity make it difficult to quantify. Dual-chamber pacing is in common usage in the UK. Recipients are more likely to be younger. Insufficient evidence is currently available to inform policy on specific groups who may benefit most frompacing with dual-chamber devices. Further important research is underway. Outstanding research priorities include the economic evaluation of UKPACE studies of the classification, diagnosis and utility associated with pacemaker syndrome and evidence on the effectiveness of pacemakers in children.
Project Status: Completed
URL for project:
Year Published: 2005
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Not Assigned
Country: England, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Bradycardia
  • Cardiac Pacing, Artificial
  • Pacemaker, Artificial
Organisation Name: NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
Contact Address: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK
Contact Name:
Contact Email:
Copyright: 2009 Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.