Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Cancer ; 122(3): 447-55, 2016 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26524087

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Given the costs of delivering care for men with prostate cancer remain poorly described, this article reports the results of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for competing treatments of low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Process maps were developed for each phase of care from the initial urologic visit through 12 years of follow-up for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), cryotherapy, high-dose rate (HDR) and low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and active surveillance (AS). The last modality incorporated both traditional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and multiparametric-MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. The costs of materials, equipment, personnel, and space were calculated per unit of time and based on the relative proportion of capacity used. TDABC for each treatment was defined as the sum of its resources. RESULTS: Substantial cost variation was observed at 5 years, with costs ranging from $7,298 for AS to $23,565 for IMRT, and they remained consistent through 12 years of follow-up. LDR brachytherapy ($8,978) was notably cheaper than HDR brachytherapy ($11,448), and SBRT ($11,665) was notably cheaper than IMRT, with the cost savings attributable to shorter procedure times and fewer visits required for treatment. Both equipment costs and an inpatient stay ($2,306) contributed to the high cost of RALP ($16,946). Cryotherapy ($11,215) was more costly than LDR brachytherapy, largely because of increased single-use equipment costs ($6,292 vs $1,921). AS reached cost equivalence with LDR brachytherapy after 7 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TDABC is feasible for analyzing cancer services and provides insights into cost-reduction tactics in an era focused on emphasizing value. By detailing all steps from diagnosis and treatment through 12 years of follow-up for low-risk prostate cancer, this study has demonstrated significant cost variation between competing treatments.


Subject(s)
Brachytherapy/economics , Health Care Costs , Population Surveillance , Prostatectomy/economics , Prostatic Neoplasms/economics , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Radiosurgery/economics , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/economics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Laparoscopy/economics , Male , Middle Aged , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Robotic Surgical Procedures/economics , United States , Watchful Waiting/economics
2.
Neurosurg Focus ; 37(5): E3, 2014 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25363431

ABSTRACT

OBJECT: To date, health care providers have devoted significant efforts to improve performance regarding patient safety and quality of care. To address the lagging involvement of health care providers in the cost component of the value equation, UCLA Health piloted the implementation of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). Here, the authors describe the implementation experiment, share lessons learned across the care continuum, and report how TDABC has actively engaged health care providers in costing activities and care redesign. METHODS: After the selection of pilots in neurosurgery and urology and the creation of the TDABC team, multidisciplinary process mapping sessions, capacity-cost calculations, and model integration were coordinated and offered to engage care providers at each phase. RESULTS: Reviewing the maps for the entire episode of care, varying types of personnel involved in the delivery of care were noted: 63 for the neurosurgery pilot and 61 for the urology pilot. The average cost capacities for care coordinators, nurses, residents, and faculty were $0.70 (range $0.63-$0.75), $1.55 (range $1.28-$2.04), $0.58 (range $0.56-$0.62), and $3.54 (range $2.29-$4.52), across both pilots. After calculating the costs for material, equipment, and space, the TDABC model enabled the linking of a specific step of the care cycle (who performed the step and its duration) and its associated costs. Both pilots identified important opportunities to redesign care delivery in a costconscious fashion. CONCLUSIONS: The experimentation and implementation phases of the TDABC model have succeeded in engaging health care providers in process assessment and costing activities. The TDABC model proved to be a catalyzing agent for cost-conscious care redesign.


Subject(s)
Costs and Cost Analysis , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Neurosurgical Procedures/economics , Process Assessment, Health Care/organization & administration , Episode of Care , Humans , Personnel Management/economics , Pilot Projects , Time Factors , Workload/economics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...