At the time I was offered the opportunity to be part of a study looking at a new style stent. I accepted and was enrolled in a double-blind study. I have been paid along the way to have EKGs done and fill out some questionnaires. Each extra visit pays $100, but that’s just 15 minutes of my time.
I will soon reach a point in the study where they open the envelope and see which group I’m in. One of the four groups will be asked to undergo a diagnostic cardiac catheterization. I’m trying to decide where my $$ cut-off lies.
How much cash would you want to undergo a cardiac catheterization? The discomfort was minimal my last go-round, and was actually an interesting experience.
Since it’s in the interest of improving treatment for heart disease I might just do it for free.
BTW I’ve had heart catheterization twice and my only request would be for the anesthetist to be generous with the “happy drug” during the procedure. My first procedure was a stent placement and that drug turned it into a downright relaxing experience.
I hear you on the drugs, fentynal and midazolam (IIRC) were sweeeeet. I enjoyed the procedure, but dealing with the pressure bandage at the insertion site was a pain.
Did they use two different sites for vascular access on yours?
I’m thinking that this will take significantly more than 15 minutes of your time (on the order of 10x). That’s without considering the added risks, which though small, are not negligible. You can take the long view of benefits to humanity. You might personally benefit (but probably not- if you needed a cath, you should get one as medical necessity, not as part of a study).
I’m thinking they will offer you more for this part of the study, as part of the study design. (I’m not saying you should negotiate- the price is probably set in the study and they probably can’t *ethically *negotiate. If they do negotiate, I’d want to stay away from folks like that.) They should at least tell you how complications will be handled and paid for.
I’ve had it done, and while the whole thing as painless from start to finish, it’s not something I’d ever want to do again. Oh, and the low-but-not-zero risks of serious complications.
So, at least $1,000.00 (and probably not for that amount, either).
I had a cath done for diagnostic purposes a few years ago. When I was waiting in the lobby before the procedure, a couple of docs recruited me to take part in a clinical trial of a blood pressure drug, seeing if it also worked to treat cardiovascular disease. The trial involved taking one of two drugs - the trial drug or the control; found out afterward that I was in the trial group - for a year, then having another cath.
Since I have hypertension, and both drugs in the study (atenolol and nebevolol) treated hypertension, and I would get a free c cath at the end of the year, I signed right up. The $150 or so they paid me was just icing.
The procedure itself was by no means unpleasant. A little boring once the happy juice wore off, and then spending six hours lying flat on my back while my femoral artery healed was an exercise in bladder control; but other than that, no big deal. I was frustrated that I couldn’t easily see the monitor when the catheter was in, because I really wanted to see my own beating heart.
I had a minor heart attack about 15 years ago. The cardiac cath wasn’t a big deal. Unfortunately they couldn’t get a stent to where the blockage was so I just live with it.
If the test would help others, I’d probably do it pretty cheap.
I don’t know about free but I would be pretty willing to go fairly cheap. If for no other reason than a serious check on the performance of something basically experimental. Things may look good from the outside but -------
(My cath was at AGH. The only part I didn’t like was laying there with that damn sandbag on my leg for what seemed to me like 13 months; actually a few hours.)
I suspect this is going to vary quite a bit with age, race, education, and income level.
I am interested in the age thing.
Would a younger person be more inclined to say yes? Can you imagine yourself as 20 years older/younger and try to answer from that viewpoint?
I have had, so far, no indication of cardiac problems. I have idiopathic hypertension, which is as close as I come. I’d be more inclined to be the guinea pig now than I would have been 20 years ago. Back then I had a career and would not want to roll those particular dice.
When I had it done they went in through a vein in my wrist so I didn’t have to deal with the pressure thing on my thigh. While I (apparently) wasn’t out cold, I have no recollection after someone said, “You are going to feel warm (or cold?) in your arm now.” The whole ting was a non-event and the test came back clear. I’d do it again for a grand.
OK, my appointment is next week, and they will “open the envelope” then. Getting $100 for each EKG/questionnaire makes me assume an invasive procedure including overnight hospitalization will pay at least a grand. Looking over the original paperwork, there is a 1 in 4 chance I’ll be offered the catheterization option.
I am 58. In my 20s I did dozens of compensated research trials, but I would pick and choose the ones that paid the most for the least discomfort. The psychology department always had the worst. They would pick one name out of all the volunteers for a $20 gift card. I turned those down. The sleep studies were the best. They paid a $125 for regular sleep studies, and up to $325 for “embarrassing” studies looking at nocturnal penile tumesence. I did lots of sleep studies. I did a study that involved “moderate dehydration” and “some discomfort”. It paid $450, but “moderate” and “some” were flat-out lies and I was really pissed off at the researchers.
I was given the impression that groin access was preferred over wrist for “reasons”. Hmmmm.
I’ll be at Presby. Ironically, my first visit there they forgot to give me parking info, so I found free parking on Atwood and walked up cardiac hill. /Pittsburgh insider talk.
Probably because in the groin, the cardiologist has access to a big, important artery that goes right to the heart, without having to navigate any joints. Whereas going in through the wrist, I imagine, means having to thread the camera through the elbow. IANA cardiologist, but that’d be my guess.
Or maybe cardiologists just like to look at dicks.
I’ve had two so far. They were fine, but I don’t really want another. Given the risk of complications (why I needed two of them), I might do another for $100k or so. It was cool seeing my insides on the monitor wall, though.
I would need at least $1000 for most of the day in the hospital and the four days I was told to wait until returning to work after the one I had this past Saturday. Fortunately, mine was in the radial artery so I wasn’t stuck flat on my back for six hours- I could sit up and walk to the restroom with assistance. However, I was prepped for groin access- I was told that although the cardiologist prefers the wrist , it can be tricky so he might have to use the groin.
