Cost of care for asylum seekers and refugees entering the United States: The case of volunteer medical providers in El Paso, Texas.

BACKGROUND: Between October 2018, and February 2020, the United States saw an unprecedented increase in the number of asylum seekers and refugees arriving unexpectedly at international crossings along the US-Mexico Border. Many of these migrants needed proper medical attention, and consequently created significant pressure on local health systems. In El Paso, Texas, volunteer clinicians, collaborating closely with religious organizations and non-governmental organizations, provided outpatient medical care for the new arrivals; the county hospital provided in-patient care at local tax payers' expense. The objective of this study was to estimate costs of healthcare services offered by these volunteers in order to formulate sustainable and appropriate healthcare policies to address the needs of refugees and asylum seekers in the United States. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used including personal interviews with stakeholders, and follow up surveys with volunteer clinicians. The cost analysis was done from the payer perspective using Medicaid reimbursement rates. RESULTS: Total costs of care provided to asylum seekers and refugees varied between $1.9MM to $4.4MM during the study period. The number of patient visits was estimated at 15,736 to 19,236, and cost per patient ranged between $99 and $281. Most common conditions treated by volunteer providers were abdominal pain, dermatological conditions, headaches, dehydration and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study looking at the cost of healthcare for refugees and asylum seekers provided by volunteer clinicians, in a binational context. The resources invested by volunteer providers were significant, and essential to meet medical needs of migrant populations. Without appropriate financial support, a strategy relying on volunteer and local community resources will prove unsustainable in the long term. Findings from this study will help formulate federal and local policies to support local health systems along the US-Mexico Border in providing care to future migrations into the United States.

A Microcosting Study of Establishing a Baby Café® in Texas.

BACKGROUND: This article focuses on the costs of opening and running a Baby Café. A Baby Café is an intervention that focuses on providing peer-to-peer support for breastfeeding mothers. Research aim: This study aimed to estimate the costs of establishing and running a Baby Café. METHODS: The authors used a microcosting approach to identifying costs using the case of a Baby Café located in San Antonio, Texas, and modeled after other existing cafés in the United States. They also used extensive literature review and conducted an informal interview with a manager of an existing Baby Café in the United States to validate our cost data. The cost analysis was done from the provider perspective. RESULTS: Costs of starting a Baby Café were $36,000, whereas annual operating costs totaled $47,000. Total discounted costs for a 5-year period amounted to $250,000, resulting in a cost per Baby Café session of $521 and cost per mother of $104. Varying the number of sessions per week and number of mothers attending each session, the discounted cost per Baby Café session ranged between $460 and $740 and the cost per mother varied between $65 and $246. CONCLUSION: These findings can be used by policy makers and organizations to evaluate local resource requirements for starting a Baby Café. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention against other breastfeeding promoting initiatives.

Methodological issues for designing and conducting a multicenter, international clinical trial in Acute Stroke: Experience from ARTSS-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: We describe innovations in the study design and the efficient data coordination of a randomized multicenter trial of Argatroban in Combination with Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Acute Stroke (ARTSS-2). METHODS: ARTSS-2 is a 3-arm, multisite/multiregional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of two doses of Argatroban injection (low, high) in combination with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) in acute ischemic stroke patients and rt-PA alone. We developed a covariate adaptive randomization program that balanced the study arms with respect to study site as well as hemorrhage after thrombolysis (HAT) score and presence of distal internal carotid artery occlusion (DICAO). We used simulation studies to validate performance of the randomization program before making any adaptations during the trial. For the first 90 patients enrolled in ARTSS-2, we evaluated performance of our randomization program using chi-square tests of homogeneity or extended Fisher's exact test. We also designed a four-step partly Bayesian safety stopping rule for low and high dose Argatroban arms. RESULTS: Homogeneity of the study arms was confirmed with respect to distribution of study site (UK sites vs. US sites, P=0.98), HAT score (0-2 vs. 3-5, P=1.0), and DICAO (N/A vs. No vs. Yes, P=0.97). Our stopping thresholds for safety of low and high dose Argatroban were not crossed. Despite challenges, data quality was assured. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend adaptive designs for randomization and Bayesian safety stopping rules for multisite Phase I/II RCTs for maintaining additional flexibility. Efficient data coordination could lead to improved data quality.

Cost analysis of PET and comprehensive lifestyle modification for the reversal of atherosclerosis.

UNLABELLED: We present a preliminary cost analysis of a combination intervention using PET and comprehensive lifestyle modification to reverse atherosclerosis. With a sensitivity of 92%-95% and specificity of 85%-95%, PET is an essential tool for high-precision diagnosis of coronary artery disease, accurately guiding optimal treatment for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. PET imaging provides a powerful visual and educational aid for helping patients identify and adopt appropriate treatments. However, little is known about the operational cost of using the technology for this purpose. METHODS: The analysis was done in the context of the Century Health Study for Cardiovascular Medicine (Century Trial), a 1,300-patient, randomized study combining PET imaging with lifestyle changes. Our methodology included a microcosting and time study focusing on estimating average direct and indirect costs. RESULTS: The total cost of the Century Trial in present-value terms is $9.2 million, which is equal to $7,058 per patient. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the present value of total costs is likely to range between $8.8 and $9.7 million, which is equivalent to $6,655-$7,606 per patient. CONCLUSION: The clinical relevance of the Century Trial is significant since it is, to our knowledge, the first randomized controlled trial to combine high-precision imaging with lifestyle strategies. The Century Trial is in its second year of a 5-y protocol, and we present preliminary findings. The results of this cost study, however, provide policy makers with an early estimate of the costs of implementing, at large scale, a combined intervention such as the Century Trial. Further, we believe that imaging-guided lifestyle management may have considerable potential for improving outcomes and reducing health-care costs by eliminating unnecessary invasive procedures.

Cost comparison of baby friendly and non-baby friendly hospitals in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to provide an economic assessment of the incremental costs associated with obtaining the World Health Organization and United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund designation as a Infant-Friendly hospital. We hypothesized that baby-friendly hospitals will have higher costs than similar non-baby-friendly hospitals. METHODS: Data from the 2007 American Hospital Association and the 2007 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Cost Reports were used to compare labor and delivery costs in baby-friendly and non-baby-friendly hospitals. Operational costs per delivery were calculated using a matched-pairs analysis of a sample of baby-friendly and non-baby-friendly hospitals in the United States. Costs associated with labor-and-delivery diagnosis-related codes were analyzed for each baby-friendly hospital and compared with the mean and median costs incurred by non-baby-friendly hospitals. RESULTS: Nursery plus labor-and-delivery costs for the baby-friendly sites were $2205 per delivery, compared with $2170 for the non-baby-friendly matched pair. Baby-friendly facilities have slightly higher costs than non-baby-friendly facilities, ranging from 1.6% to 5%, but these costs were not statistically significant (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that becoming baby-friendly is relatively cost-neutral for a typical acute care hospital. Although the overall expense of providing baby-friendly hospital nursery services is greater than nursery service costs of non-baby-friendly hospitals, the cost difference was not statistically significant. Additional research is needed to compare the economic impact of maternal and infant health benefits from breastfeeding versus the incremental expenses of becoming a baby-friendly hospital.

Strategic performance evaluation in cancer centers.

Most research in healthcare strategy has focused on formulating or implementing organizational plans and strategies, and little attention has been dedicated to the post-implementation control and evaluation of strategy, which we contend is the most critical aspect of achieving organizational goals. The objective of this study was to identify strategic control approaches used by major cancer centers in the country and to relate these practices to financial performance. Our intent was to expand the theory and practice of healthcare strategy to focused services, such as oncology. We designed a 17-question survey to capture elements of strategy and performance from our study sample, which comprised major cancer hospitals in the United States and shared similar mandates and resource constraints. The results suggest that high-performing cancer centers use more sophisticated analytical approaches, invest greater financial resources in performance analysis, and conduct more frequent performance reviews than do low-performing organizations. Our conclusions point to the need for a more robust approach to strategic assessment. In this article, we offer a number of recommendations for management to achieve strategic plans and goals on the basis of our research. To our knowledge, this study is one of the first to concentrate on the area of strategic control.