ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The older adult (65+) population in the USA is increasing and with it the number of medically treated falls. In 2015, healthcare spending attributable to older adult falls was approximately US$50 billion. We aim to update the estimated medical expenditures attributable to older adult non-fatal falls. METHODS: Generalised linear models using 2017, 2019 and 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and cost supplement files were used to estimate the association of falls with healthcare expenditures while adjusting for demographic characteristics and health conditions in the model. To portion out the share of total healthcare spending attributable to falls versus not, we adjusted for demographic characteristics and health conditions, including self-reported health status and certain comorbidities associated with increased risk of falling or higher healthcare expenditure. We calculated a fall-attributable fraction of expenditure as total expenditures minus total expenditures with no falls divided by total expenditures. We applied the fall-attributable fraction of expenditure from the regression model to the 2020 total expenditures from the National Health Expenditure Data to calculate total healthcare spending attributable to older adult falls. RESULTS: In 2020, healthcare expenditure for non-fatal falls was US$80.0 billion, with the majority paid by Medicare. CONCLUSION: Healthcare spending for non-fatal older adult falls was substantially higher than previously reported estimates. This highlights the growing economic burden attributable to older adult falls and these findings can be used to inform policies on fall prevention efforts in the USA.
Subject(s)
Accidental Falls , Health Expenditures , Medicare , Humans , Accidental Falls/economics , Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Accidental Falls/prevention & control , United States/epidemiology , Aged , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Male , Female , Medicare/economics , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The state of Vermont has a statewide waiver from the centers for medicare and medicaid services to allow all-payer Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). The Vermont all-payer model (VAPM) waiver is layered upon previous reforms establishing regional community health teams (CHTs) and medical homes. The waiver is intended to incentivize healthcare value and quality and create alignment between health system payers, providers, and CHTs. The objective of this study was to examine CHT's trade-offs and preferences for health, equity, and spending and the alignment with VAPM priorities. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Data were gathered from a survey and discrete choice experiment among CHT leadership and CHT team members of the 13 CHTs in Vermont. STUDY DESIGN: We used conditional logit models to model the choice as a function of its characteristics (attributes) and mixed logit models to analyze whether preferences for programs varied by persons and roles within CHTs. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: There were 60 respondents who completed the survey online with 14 choice tasks, with three program options in each task, for a total sample size of 2520. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found that CHTs prioritized programs in the community health plan and those with quantitative evidence of effectiveness. They were less likely to choose either programs targeting racial and ethnic minorities or programs having a small effect on a large population. Preferences did not vary across individual or community attributes. Program priorities of the VAPM, especially healthcare spending, were not prioritized. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the new VAPM does not automatically create system alignment: CHTs tended to prioritize local needs and voices. The statewide priorities are less important to CHTs, which have excellent internal alignment. This creates potential disconnection between state and community health goals. However, CHTs and the VAPM prioritize similar populations, indicating an opportunity to increase alignment by allowing flexible programs tailored to local needs. CHTs also prioritized programs with a strong evidence base, suggesting another potential avenue to create system alignment.
Subject(s)
Accountable Care Organizations , Medicare , Aged , United States , Humans , Public Health , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to explore the factors influencing how individual Community Health Teams (CHTs) make decisions about what services to offer and how to allocate their resources. METHODS: We conducted thirteen semi-structured interviews with all 13 CHTs program managers between January and March, 2021. We analyzed interviewees descriptions of their service offerings, resources allocation, and decision-making process to identify themes. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged from the interview data as factors influencing community health team program managers' decision-making process: commitment to offering high-quality care coordination, Blueprint's stable and flexible structure, use of data in priority setting, and leveraging community partnerships and local resources. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based CHTs with flexible funding allowed programs to tailor service offerings in response to community needs. It is important for teams to have access to community-level data. Teams are cultivating and leveraging community partners to increase their care coordination capacity, which is focus of their work. CHTs are a model for leveraging community partnerships to increase service capacity and pubic engagement in health services for other states to replicate.
Subject(s)
Public Health , Resource Allocation , Humans , Qualitative Research , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: During 2020-21, the United States used a multifaceted approach to control SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) and reduce mortality and morbidity. This included non-medical interventions (NMIs), aggressive vaccine development and deployment, and research into more effective approaches to medically treat Covid-19. Each approach had both costs and benefits. The objective of this study was to calculate the Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for three major Covid-19 policies: NMIs, vaccine development and deployment (Vaccines), and therapeutics and care improvements within the hospital setting (HTCI). METHODS: To simulate the number of QALYs lost per scenario, we developed a multi-risk Susceptible-Infected-Recovered (SIR) model where infection and fatality rates vary between regions. We use a two equation SIR model. The first equation represents changes in the number of infections and is a function of the susceptible population, the infection rate and the recovery rate. The second equation shows the changes in the susceptible population as people recover. Key costs included loss of economic productivity, reduced future earnings due to educational closures, inpatient spending and the cost of vaccine development. Benefits included reductions in Covid-19 related deaths, which were offset in some models by additional cancer deaths due to care delays. RESULTS: The largest cost is the reduction in economic output associated with NMI ($1.7 trillion); the second most significant cost is the educational shutdowns, with estimated reduced lifetime earnings of $523B. The total estimated cost of vaccine development is $55B. HTCI had the lowest cost per QALY gained vs "do nothing" with a cost of $2,089 per QALY gained. Vaccines cost $34,777 per QALY gained in isolation, while NMIs alone were dominated by other options. HTCI alone dominated most alternatives, except the combination of HTCI and Vaccines ($58,528 per QALY gained) and HTCI, Vaccines and NMIs ($3.4 m per QALY gained). CONCLUSIONS: HTCI was the most cost effective and was well justified under any standard cost effectiveness threshold. The cost per QALY gained for vaccine development, either alone or in concert with other approaches, is well within the standard for cost effectiveness. NMIs reduced deaths and saved QALYs, but the cost per QALY gained is well outside the usual accepted limits.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemiological Models , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Models, Economic , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Private managed care plans in the Medicare Advantage (MA) program have been gaining market share relative to traditional fee-for-service Medicare (TM), yet there are no obvious structural changes to Medicare that would explain this growth. Our goal is to explain the growth in MA market share during a period when it increased dramatically. STUDY DESIGN: Data are drawn from a representative sample of the Medicare population from 2007 to 2018. METHODS: We decomposed MA growth into changes in the values of explanatory variables that influence MA enrollment (eg, income and payment rate) and changes in preferences for MA vs TM (estimated coefficients) using a nonlinear version of the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition to distinguish the sources of MA growth. We find that the relatively smooth growth in MA market share masks 2 distinct growth periods. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2012, 73% of the increase was due to changes in the values of the explanatory variables, and only 27% was due to changes in coefficients. In contrast, from 2012 to 2018, changes in explanatory variables, particularly MA payment levels, would have led to a decline in MA market share if that effect had not been offset by changes in the coefficients. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we find that MA is becoming more appealing to more educated and nonminority beneficiaries than in the past, although minority and lower-income beneficiaries are still more likely to pick the program. Over time, if preferences continue to shift, the nature of the MA program will change as it moves more toward the middle of the Medicare distribution.
Subject(s)
Medicare Part C , Aged , Humans , United States , Fee-for-Service PlansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Colorectal surgery is expensive. Few studies have evaluated complications as an economic cost driver, and there is little evidence comparing multiple cost drivers of colorectal surgery to determine the most effective means of reducing total cost. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the effects of surgical techniques, use of enhanced recovery protocols, and presence or absence of complications on the total cost of hospitalization for elective colorectal surgery. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis using data from 2011 to 2018 was performed. The primary end point was a mean cost per hospitalization. The cost was compared between patients who experienced minimally invasive versus open surgeries, enhanced recovery after surgery protocols versus not, and complications versus none. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a university-affiliated teaching hospital in the Northeastern United States. PATIENTS: Adult patients who have undergone elective colorectal surgery were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome for this study was the mean cost per hospitalization calculated using inpatient cost based on the total cost of the episode of care. RESULTS: A total of 1039 patients met the criteria for inclusion. The average cost of all hospitalizations was $19,801. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that enhanced recovery protocols substantially lowered the cost of care by $6392 ( p = 0.001), whereas complications increased the cost of care by $16,780 per episode ( p < 0.001). When complications occurred, enhanced recovery protocols reduced the cost by $17,963 ( p = 0.010). LIMITATIONS: This retrospective cohort study performed at a single institution has inherent limitations, including confounding and selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: For elective colorectal surgery, complications are associated with significantly increased costs. Avoiding complications should be a priority to reduce costs. Enhanced recovery protocols are associated with significantly reduced costs. Surgeons should focus future research efforts on improving protocols and processes that decrease postoperative complications to improve patient outcomes and to reduce costs associated with elective colorectal hospitalizations. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B927 . FACTORES DE COSTO DE LA CIRUGA ELECTIVA DE COLON Y RECTO UN ANLISIS DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVE: ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía colorrectal es costosa. Pocos estudios han examinado las complicaciones como un factor de costo económico, y hay poca evidencia que compare múltiples factores de costo de la cirugía colorrectal para determinar los medios más efectivos para reducir el costo total.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo determinar los efectos de las técnicas quirúrgicas, el uso de protocolos de enhanced recovery y la presencia o ausencia de complicaciones en el costo total de hospitalización por cirugía colorrectal electiva.DISEÑO:Se realizó un análisis retrospectivo de cohortes utilizando data del 2011-2018. El punto principal fue el costo medio por hospitalización. Se comparó el costo entre los pacientes que experimentaron: cirugías mínimamente invasivas versus abiertas, protocolos de enhanced recovery después de la cirugía versus no, y complicaciones versus no.FUENTE DE DATOS:Se consultó la base de datos financiera y contable del hospital y el registro médico electrónico para la obtencion de datos.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en un hospital docente afiliado a una universidad en el noreste de los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes adultos sometidos a cirugía colorrectal electiva.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal de este estudio fue el costo medio por hospitalización calculado utilizando el costo de hospitalización basado en el costo total del episodio de atención.RESULTADOS:Un total de 1.039 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. El costo promedio de todas las hospitalizaciones fue de $19801. El análisis multivariante demostró que los protocolos de enhanced recovery redujeron sustancialmente el costo de la atención en $6392 ( p = 0,001), mientras que las complicaciones aumentaron el costo en $16780 por episodio ( p < 0,001). Cuando ocurrieron complicaciones, los protocolos de enhanced recovery redujeron el costo en $17963 ( p = 0,010).LIMITACIONES:Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo realizado en una sola institución y tiene limitaciones inherentes que incluyen confusión y sesgo de selección.CONCLUSIONES:Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B927 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).
Subject(s)
Colectomy , Hospitalization , Adult , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Colectomy/adverse effects , Colectomy/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , ColonABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: National efforts to control US healthcare spending are potentially undermined by changes in patient characteristics, and in particular increases in rates of obesity and overweight. The objective of this study was to provide current estimates of the effect of obesity and overweight on healthcare spending overall, by service line and by payer using the National Institutes of Health classifications for BMI. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental design and analyzed the data using generalized linear models and two-part models to estimate obesity- and overweight-attributable spending. Data was drawn from the 2006 and 2016 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey. We identified individuals in the different BMI classes based on self-reported height and weight. RESULTS: Total medical costs attributable to obesity rose to $126 billion per year by 2016, although the marginal cost of obesity declined for all obesity classes. The overall spending increase was due to an increase in obesity prevalence and a population shift to higher obesity classes. Obesity related spending between 2006 and 2016 was relatively constant due to decreases in inpatient spending, which were only partially offset by increases in outpatient spending. CONCLUSIONS: While total obesity related spending between 2006 and 2016 was relatively constant, by examining the effect of different obesity classes and overweight, it provides insight into spend for each level of obesity and overweight across service line and payer mix. Obesity class 2 and 3 were the main factors driving spending increases, suggesting that persons over BMI of 35 should be the focus for policies focused on controlling spending, such as prevention.
Subject(s)
Health Expenditures , Overweight , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Obesity/epidemiology , Overweight/epidemiology , PrevalenceABSTRACT
In the beginning of the COVID-19 US epidemic in March 2020, sweeping lockdowns and other aggressive measures were put in place and retained in many states until end of August of 2020; the ensuing economic downturn has led many to question the wisdom of the early COVID-19 policy measures in the US. This study's objective was to evaluate the cost and benefit of the US COVID-19-mitigating policy intervention during the first six month of the pandemic in terms of COVID-19 mortality potentially averted, versus mortality potentially attributable to the economic downturn. We conducted a synthesis-based retrospective cost-benefit analysis of the full complex of US federal, state, and local COVID-19-mitigating measures, including lockdowns and all other COVID-19-mitigating measures, against the counterfactual scenario involving no public health intervention. We derived parameter estimates from a rapid review and synthesis of recent epidemiologic studies and economic literature on regulation-attributable mortality. According to our estimates, the policy intervention saved 866,350-1,711,150 lives (4,886,214-9,650,886 quality-adjusted life-years), while mortality attributable to the economic downturn was 57,922-245,055 lives (2,093,811-8,858,444 life-years). We conclude that the number of lives saved by the spring-summer lockdowns and other COVID-19-mitigation was greater than the number of lives potentially lost due to the economic downturn. However, the net impact on quality-adjusted life expectancy is ambiguous.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Models, Statistical , Public Health/economics , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Quarantine/economics , COVID-19/economics , Communicable Disease Control/economics , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Humans , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Life/psychology , Quarantine/ethics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Reducing inappropriate referrals to specialists is a challenge for the healthcare system as it seeks to transition from volume to value-based healthcare. Given the projection of a severe shortage of rheumatologists in the near future, innovative strategies to decrease demand for rheumatology services may prove more fruitful than increasing the supply of rheumatologists. Efforts to increase appropriate utilization through reductions in capacity may have the unintended consequence of reducing appropriate care as well. This highlights the challenges in increasing the appropriate use of high cost services as the health system transitions to value based care. The objective of this study was to analyze factors affecting appropriateness of rheumatology services. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of patients receiving Rheumatology services between November 2013 and October 2019. We used a proxy for "appropriateness": whether or not there was any follow-up care after the first appointment. Results from regression analysis and physicians' chart reviews were compared using an inter-rater reliability measure (kappa). Data was drawn from the EHR 2013-2019. RESULTS: We found that inappropriate referrals increased 14.3% when a new rheumatologist was hired, which increased to 14.8% after wash-out period of 6 months; 15.7% after 12 months; 15.5% after 18 months and 16.7% after 18 months. Other factors influencing appropriateness of referrals included severity of disease, gender and insurance type, but not specialty of referring provider. CONCLUSIONS: Given the projection of a severe shortage of rheumatologists in the near future, innovative strategies to decrease demand for rheumatology services may prove more fruitful than increasing the supply of rheumatologists. Innovative strategies to decrease demand for rheumatology services may prove more fruitful than increasing the supply of rheumatologists. These findings may apply to other specialties as well. This study is relevant for health care systems that are implementing value-based payment models aimed at reducing inappropriate care.
Subject(s)
Rheumatology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Referral and Consultation , Reproducibility of Results , RheumatologistsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Reducing the extra burden COVID-19 has on people already facing disparities is among the main national priorities for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Early reports from states releasing vaccination data by race show that White residents are being vaccinated at significantly higher rates than Black residents. Public health efforts are being targeted to address vaccine hesitancy among Black and other minority populations. However, health care interventions intended to reduce health disparities that do not reflect the underlying values of individuals in underrepresented populations are unlikely to be successful. OBJECTIVE: To identify key factors underlying the disparities in COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Primary data were collected from an online survey of a representative sample of the populations of the 4 largest US states (New York, California, Texas, and Florida) between August 10 and September 3, 2020. Using latent class analysis, we built a model identifying key factors underlying the disparities in COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: We found that individuals who identify as Black had lower rates of vaccine hesitancy than those who identify as White. This was true overall, by latent class and within latent class. This suggests that, contrary to what is currently being reported, Black individuals are not universally more vaccine hesitant. Combining the respondents who would not consider a vaccine (17%) with those who would consider one but ultimately choose not to vaccinate (11%), our findings indicate that more than 1 in 4 (28%) persons will not be willing to vaccinate. The no-vaccine rate is highest in White individuals and lowest in Black individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that other factors, potentially institutional, are driving the vaccination rates for these groups. Our model results help point the way to more effective differentiated policies. DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for this study. The authors have nothing to disclose.
Subject(s)
Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination Refusal/ethnology , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Since the start of the global COVID-19 pandemic, countries have been mirroring each other's policies to mitigate the spread of the virus. Whether current measures alone will lead to behavioral change such as social distancing, washing hands, and wearing a facemask is not well understood. The objective of this study is to better understand individual variation in behavioral responses to COVID-19 by exploring the influence of beliefs, motivations and policy measures on public health behaviors. We do so by comparing The Netherlands and Flanders, the Dutch speaking part of Belgium. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Our final sample included 2,637 respondents from The Netherlands and 1,678 from Flanders. The data was nationally representative along three dimensions: age, gender, and household income in both countries. Our key outcome variables of interest were beliefs about policy effectiveness; stated reasons for complying with public rules; and changes in behavior. For control variables, we included a number of measures of how severe the respondent believed Covid-19 to be and a number of negative side effects that the person may have experienced: loneliness, boredom, anxiety, and conflicts with friends and neighbors. Finally, we controlled for socio-demographic factors: age, gender, income (categorical), education (categorical) and the presence of Covid-19 risk factors (diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, asthma, allergies). The dependent variable for each of the estimation models is dichotomous, so we used Probit models to predict the probability of engaging in a given behavior. We found that motivations, beliefs about the effectiveness of measures, and pre-pandemic behavior play an important role. The Dutch were more likely to wash their hands than the Flemish (15.4%, p<0.01), visit family (15.5%, p < .01), run errands (12.0%, p<0.05) or go to large closed spaces such as a shopping mall (21.2%, p<0.01). The Dutch were significantly less likely to wear a mask (87.6%, p<0.01). We also found that beliefs about the virus, psychological effects of the virus, as well as pre-pandemic behavior play a role in adherence to recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that policymakers should consider behavioral motivations specific to their country in their COVID-19 strategies. In addition, the belief that a policy is effective significantly increased the probability of the behavior, so policy measures should be accompanied by public health campaigns to increase adherence.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Behavior , Motivation , Pandemics , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Masks , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Physical DistancingABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Falls among older adults are a significant health concern affecting more than a quarter of older adults (age 65+). Certain fall risk factors, such as medication use, increase fall risk among older adults (age 65+). AIM: The aim of this study is to examine the association between antidepressant-medication subclass use and self-reported falls in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: This analysis used the 2009-2013 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, a nationally representative panel survey. A total of 8,742 community-dwelling older adults, representing 40,639,884 older Medicare beneficiaries, were included. We compared self-reported falls and psychoactive medication use, including antidepressant subclasses. These data are controlled for demographic, functional, and health characteristics associated with increased fall risk. Descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted using SAS 9.4 and Stata 15 software. RESULTS: The most commonly used antidepressant subclass were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) antidepressants (13.1%). After controlling for characteristics associated with increased fall risk (including depression and concurrent psychoactive medication use), the risk of falling among older adults increased by approximately 30% among those who used a SSRI or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) compared to non-users. The adjusted risk ratio (aRR) for SSRI was 1.29 (95% CIâ¯=â¯1.13, 1.47) and for SNRI was 1.32 (95% CIâ¯=â¯1.07, 1.62). CONCLUSION: SSRI and SNRI are associated with increased risk of falling after adjusting for important confounders. Medication use is a modifiable fall risk factor in older adults and can be targeted to reduce risk of falls. Practical Applications: Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors increased the risk of falling in older adults by approximately 30%, even after controlling for demographic, functional, and health characteristics, including depression. Health care providers can work towards reducing fall risk among their older patients by minimizing the use of certain medications when potential risks outweigh the benefits.
Subject(s)
Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Independent Living , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors/adverse effects , Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors/adverse effects , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antidepressive Agents/classification , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Risk Factors , Self Report , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Introduction: Both hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia in hospitalized patients have been shown to be associated with a longer length of stay, higher readmission rates, and higher rates of morbidity and mortality. With 25%-30% of all hospitalized patients carrying a diagnosis of diabetes, it is important to optimize glycaemic control. Current guidelines for care of inpatients with diabetes now suggest consulting a specialized diabetes team for all patients when possible. Aim: This study was a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the impact of an inpatient diabetology consult within 48 hours of admission on patients' length of stay. Methods: All patients admitted to the general medicine service between 2013 and 2018 with a diagnosis of diabetes in their medical record were included, which consisted of 11 477 inpatient stays. We looked at the effect of an inpatient diabetology consultation within the first 48 hours on length of stay, complications and 30-day readmission rates. Results: We found that patients whose care included a diabetology consult within 48 hours of admission had a statistically significant shorter length of stay by 1.56 days compared to the remainder of the group. There was no difference in complications or 30-day readmission rates between the groups. Conclusion: Among general medicine patients with a diagnosis of diabetes, timely diabetology consultations reduced patients' length of stay and have the potential to improve their care and lessen the economic impact.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Hospitalization , Hyperglycemia , Hypoglycemia , Inpatients , Length of Stay , Referral and Consultation , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetes Complications , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Hospitalization/economics , Humans , Hyperglycemia/etiology , Hypoglycemia/etiology , Length of Stay/economics , Patient Readmission , Referral and Consultation/economics , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Importance: Prostate radiation therapy (PRT) is a treatment option in men with low-volume metastatic prostate cancer based on the results of the Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy Arm H (STAMPEDE-H) trial. However, the cost-effectiveness of this treatment remains unaddressed. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of PRT when added to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for men with low-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used microsimulation modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding PRT to ADT. A simulated cohort of 10 000 individuals with low-volume mHSPC was created. Data from men with low-volume mHSPC were extracted and analyzed from January 18, 2019, through July 4, 2020. Transition probabilities were extracted from the STAMPEDE-H study. Health states included stable disease, progression, second progression, and death. Individual grade 2 or higher genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic events associated with PRT were tracked. Univariable deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty with regard to the model assumptions. Health state utility estimates were based on the published literature. Exposures: The combination of PRT and ADT using regimens of 20 fractions and 6 weekly fractions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included net quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs in US dollars, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A strategy was classified as dominant if it was associated with higher QALYs at lower costs than the alternative and dominated if it was associated with fewer QALYs at higher costs than the alternative. Results: For the base case scenario of men 68 years of age with low-volume mHSPC, the modeled outcomes were similar to the target clinical data for overall survival, failure-free survival, and rates of PRT-related toxic effects. The addition of PRT was a dominant strategy compared with ADT alone, with a gain of 0.16 QALYs (95% CI, 0.15-0.17 QALYs) and a reduction in net costs by $19â¯472 (95% CI, $23â¯096-$37â¯362) at 37 months of follow-up and a gain of 0.81 QALYs (95% CI, 0.73-0.89 QALYs) and savings of $30â¯229 (95% CI, $23â¯096-$37â¯362) with lifetime follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In the economic evaluation, PRT was a dominant treatment strategy compared with ADT alone. These findings suggest that addition of PRT to ADT is a cost-effective treatment for men with low-volume mHSPC.
Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiotherapy/economics , Aged , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: From 2011 to 2015, a series of quality improvement interventions were developed that targeted pediatric persistent asthmatics that included recalls for those overdue for care and access to specialist care. The objective of this study was to assess the impact on urgent care and emergency department visits and hospitalizations from enrollment into at least one intervention during the time period. METHODS: Persistent asthmatics were identified through electronic medical records, with patients having an asthma designation containing "persistent," asthma control containing "poor", and asthma risk being "high risk." Asthma utilization events were identified for these patients between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2015 using ICD-9 diagnosis codes. Evaluation focused on differences in utilization for patients before and after receiving interventions through the use of logistic regression for each utilization outcome. RESULTS: The interventions were delivered to 1060 children out of a total of 2046 identified as having the persistent asthmatic criteria. The intervention group consisted of 389 (36.7%) moderate persistent asthmatics and 643 (60.7%) mild persistent asthmatics, with 976 (92.1%) identifying as a minority. Analysis of 60692 months of data showed patients who received the intervention were less likely to visit the urgent care (OR [0.80, 0.96]) or be hospitalized (OR [0.37, 0.75]) than those who did not receive any interventions. Adjustment for provider referral into the interventions resulted in slight changes for both hospitalizations (OR [0.38, 0.79]) and urgent care (OR [0.68, 0.94]). CONCLUSION: Children receiving interventions were less likely to be hospitalized or visit urgent care clinics.
Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Asthma/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Care Management , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Risk AssessmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cross-jurisdictional sharing is gaining traction as an option for increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of public health services in local health departments. RESEARCH AIM: Assess whether breastfeeding initiation among participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children changed with the addition of a trained breastfeeding specialist funded by cross-jurisdictional integration. METHODS: A longitudinal retrospective comparative difference in difference design using state-based program data, pre- and post-integration was undertaken. Three local county health departments (n = 5) that fully integrated into one Community Health Board during January 2015, and four neighboring Community Health Boards (n = 4) that did not integrate, were included. RESULTS: Controlling for confounders and interactions, the relative rate of change over time in breastfeeding initiation rates was greater in the integrated jurisdiction than neighboring Community Health Boards, but not statistically significant. When the integrated Community Health Board's original three local health departments were considered separately, the relative rate of change over time in breastfeeding rates was greater for one local health department in comparison to three neighbor Community Health Boards (p = .037, .048, and .034, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a specialized breastfeeding nutritionist led to improved breastfeeding initiation rates. The increase was significant only in the largest original local health department, which also had the lowest breastfeeding initiation rate pre-merger. The greatest positive change was seen in this local health department where the specialist staff was physically located. Public health staff specialization can lead to increases in economic efficiency and in improved delivery of public health services.
Subject(s)
Breast Feeding , Child , Female , Humans , Infant , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Hospital readmission within 30 days is undesirable and costly. Most programs and studies have focused on the Medicare population and readmission prevention through discharge planning; less is understood about how Medicaid might reduce readmissions to improve outcomes and control program costs. The objective of this study was to estimate the relationship between the Colorado Medicaid Accountable Care Collaborative (ACC) and 30-day hospital readmission rates. A difference-in-differences design was used to compare 30-day readmissions before and after Medicaid members were enrolled in the ACC program using 2 different control groups: Medicaid members not enrolled and commercially insured. The authors used Probit regressions at the hospital level, controlling for patient characteristics, and clustered errors at the provider level. The study sample included Colorado adults ages 19-64 with qualifying hospital discharge. Analysis data included Medicaid and commercial payer administrative claims data (2009-2015) from Colorado's All-Payer Claims Database. The ACC program significantly reduced 30-day readmissions among Colorado Medicaid patients. Participation in the ACC program reduced the probability of a 30-day readmission by 1.4% (P < 0.001), with the largest effect among maternity and delivery patients. Because the majority of Medicaid members are female, even after Medicaid expansion, and Medicaid covers a disproportionate share of complex births, maternity and delivery readmissions are a fruitful area for reducing Medicaid expenditures. To reduce readmissions, Medicaid programs will need to develop interventions specific to their populations.
Subject(s)
Medicaid , Patient Readmission , Adult , Female , Health Expenditures , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , United States , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many studies have focused on the characteristics of symptomatic patients with COVID-19 and clinical risk factors. This study reports the prevalence of COVID-19 in an asymptomatic population of a hospital service area (HSA) and identifies factors that affect exposure to the virus. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to measure the prevalence of COVID-19 in an HSA, identify factors that may increase or decrease the risk of infection, and analyze factors that increase the number of daily contacts. METHODS: This study surveyed 1694 patients between April 30 and May 13, 2020, about their work and living situations, income, behavior, sociodemographic characteristics, and prepandemic health characteristics. This data was linked to testing data for 454 of these patients, including polymerase chain reaction test results and two different serologic assays. Positivity rate was used to calculate approximate prevalence, hospitalization rate, and infection fatality rate (IFR). Survey data was used to analyze risk factors, including the number of contacts reported by study participants. The data was also used to identify factors increasing the number of daily contacts, such as mask wearing and living environment. RESULTS: We found a positivity rate of 2.2%, a hospitalization rate of 1.2%, and an adjusted IFR of 0.55%. A higher number of daily contacts with adults and older adults increases the probability of becoming infected. Occupation, living in an apartment versus a house, and wearing a face mask outside work increased the number of daily contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Studying prevalence in an asymptomatic population revealed estimates of unreported COVID-19 cases. Occupational, living situation, and behavioral data about COVID-19-protective behaviors such as wearing a mask may aid in the identification of nonclinical factors affecting the number of daily contacts, which may increase SARS-CoV-2 exposure.
Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Diseases , COVID-19/epidemiology , Employment , Housing , Infection Control , Masks , Contact Tracing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced many health systems to proactively reduce care delivery to prepare for an expected surge in hospitalizations. There have been concerns that care deferral may have negative health effects, but it is hoped that telemedicine can provide a viable alternative. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand what type of health care services were being deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, the role played by telemedicine to fill in care gaps, and changes in attitudes toward telemedicine. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of survey responses from 1694 primary care patients in a mid-sized northeastern city. Our main outcomes were use of telemedicine and reports of care deferral during the shutdown. RESULTS: Deferred care was widespread-48% (n=812) of respondents deferred care-but it was largely for preventive services, particularly dental and primary care, and did not cause concerns about negative health effects. In total, 30.2% (n=242) of those who delayed care were concerned about health effects, with needs centered around orthopedics and surgery. Telemedicine was viewed more positively than prior to the pandemic; it was seen as a viable option to deliver deferred care, particularly by respondents who were over 65 years of age, female, and college educated. Mental health services stood out for having high levels of deferred care. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary health system shutdowns will give rise to deferred care. However, much of the deferrals will be for preventive services. The effect of this on patient health can be moderated by prioritizing surgical and orthopedic services and delivering other services through telemedicine. Having telemedicine as an option is particularly crucial for mental health services.
Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Coronavirus Infections , Health Care Rationing , Health Services Accessibility , Health Services , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Telemedicine , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care , Female , General Surgery , Humans , Male , Mental Health Services , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Primary Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: There is an ongoing policy discussion regarding an adequate breadth of provider networks. Health plans with "restricted networks" of providers have proved surprisingly popular on the Affordable Care Act health insurance exchanges because of a substantial gap in premiums between plans with open networks and closed networks. The objective of this paper is to assess which other attributes of the provider network matter to patients when choosing health insurance. STUDY DESIGN: We used a discrete choice experiment to analyze the effect of previously unobserved characteristics regarding provider networks on plan choice, including wait time, breadth, travel time, whether the plan covers care for their personal doctor, and monthly premium. Hypothetical plan options were offered to respondents of an online survey using Qualtrics software. METHODS: We used mixed multinomial logit models to estimate preference-based utilities for attributes of primary care provider networks and willingness to pay. RESULTS: Coverage of a personal doctor was the most important attribute, followed by premium, wait time to see a primary care provider, the breadth of the network, and travel time to the closest doctor covered by the plan. Respondents were willing to pay $95 per month to have a plan that covers care for their personal doctor, and they were willing to wait 6 days for an appointment to have a plan covering care for their personal doctor. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide new insights to federal and state legislators developing new models or standards on network adequacy and patient decision support tools.