Are there financial savings associated with supplementing current diagnostic practice for preeclampsia with a novel test? Learnings from a modeling analysis from a German payer perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the financial impact of adding a novel serum test to the current diagnostic toolkit for preeclampsia (PE) detection in Germany. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was created to quantify the economic impact of adding a recently developed novel diagnostic test for PE (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) to current diagnostic practice in Germany. The model simulated a cohort of 1000 pregnant patients receiving obstetric care and quantified the budget impact of adding the novel test to current German PE detection and management practices. RESULTS: The model estimates that the costs associated with managing a typical pregnancy in Germany are €941 when the novel test is used versus €1579 with standard practice. This represents savings of €637 per pregnant woman, even when the test is used as a supplementary diagnostic tool. The savings are attributed to the novel test's ability to better classify patients relative to current practice, specifically, its ability to reduce false negatives by 67% and false positives by 71%. CONCLUSION: The novel PE test has the potential to provide substantial cost savings to German healthcare payers, even when used as an addition to standard practice. Better classification of patients at risk for developing PE and declassification of those that are not compared to current practice leads to economic savings for the healthcare system. Furthermore, by reducing the rates of false-positive and false-negative classification relative to current standard of care, the test helps better target healthcare spending and lowers overall costs associated with PE care.

The impact of 'best-practice' patient care in fibromyalgia on practice economics.

OBJECTIVE: The office time required for primary care physicians (PCPs) to diagnose, treat and manage fibromyalgia (FM) patients can be extensive. The study objective was to determine if PCPs can positively impact practice economics by requiring fewer patient visits and less office time, while still achieving an acceptable quality of life, as reported by the physician. STUDY DESIGN: Survey of PCPs who diagnose, manage and treat FM patients. METHODS: Surveys were administered to US private practice PCPs, obtaining information on the number of office visits, and time spent with FM patients. PCPs were allotted into two groups: FM-efficient (FME; n = 40) and FM usual care (FMUC; n = 54), based on their reported ability to achieve an acceptable quality of life for ≥50% of their FM patients in less than four office visits post FM diagnosis. An economic model estimated the monetary value of each PCP cohorts' time spent with a newly diagnosed FM patient over a 2-year timeframe. RESULTS: Significant office time cost differences across 2 years exist between FME PCPs and FMUC PCPs ($840 vs. $1117, P < 0.05). FME PCPs had a significantly lower cost of scheduled time to confirm diagnosis ($243 vs. $339, P < 0.05) and time to find right treatment ($264 vs. $365, P < 0.05) than FMUC PCPs. Both groups incurred costs related to excess visit time, but it was less for FME PCPs ($119, 29 minutes) than FMUC PCPs ($182, 44 minutes, P < 0.01), driven by quicker diagnosis confirmation (P < 0.01) and treatment initiation (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Research suggests that efficient FM care delivery during diagnosis and treatment can be associated with improved practice economics.

Efficient practices associated with diagnosis, treatment and management of fibromyalgia among primary care physicians.

OBJECTIVES: To describe beliefs and practice patterns of primary care physicians (PCPs) providing fibromyalgia (FM) care, and to characterize differences between PCPs who report being able to provide timely and beneficial care versus the remaining PCPs. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach including surveys followed by semi-structured focus groups among United States-based PCPs in seven cities was used. Post hoc, a composite threshold of timely and beneficial care, defined as PCPs reports of at least one-half of their patients achieving an 'acceptable' quality of life within one to four office visits after diagnosis, was created to compare subgroups. RESULTS: Forty-six per cent of PCPs reported some uncertainty when diagnosing FM. PCPs reported personally treating approximately two-thirds of their patients (63%), and reported an average of three dosage titrations. In a post hoc exploratory analysis, 42.5% of PCPs met a composite threshold of self-reported timely and beneficial FM care. These PCPs reported fewer office visits to confirm an FM diagnosis (2.7 versus 4.0 visits [P<0.01]) and more patients with 'significant improvement' (38% versus 23% [P<0.01]) after six months of treatment compared with the remaining PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians self-reported an inadequacy in diagnosing, treating and managing patients with FM in current practice. A subset of PCPs, however, perceived an ability to reach a definitive diagnosis and initiate treatment plans relatively sooner than the other respondents. If the perception of this subset can be confirmed with objective clinical outcomes, and these behaviours modelled, steps could be taken to improve FM care within the broader PCP setting.

Financial impact of a novel pre-eclampsia diagnostic test versus standard practice: a decision-analytic modeling analysis from a UK healthcare payer perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Pre-eclampsia (PE), a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, is only detected after symptomatic onset. Early diagnosis may be possible with a new serum test, with resulting clinical and economic benefits versus standard practice. The authors evaluated the financial impact to the UK National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed in which a cohort of 1,000 pregnant women receiving UK obstetric care was simulated. The economic impact of improved sensitivity and specificity of the novel PE test [Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland] over current diagnostic practice was modeled. While there is no specific approved diagnostic test to detect PE, physicians are using a combination of tests including blood pressure, proteinuria, Doppler, serum uric acid, etc. The novel PE test constitutes two novel biomarkers Placenta Growth Factor (PlGF) and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1) which can be quantitatively analyzed using an automated system widely available in hospitals or laboratories (Elecsys/Cobas, Roche Diagnostics) and measures the levels of PlGF and sFlt-1 growth factors in pregnant women. The analysis assumed administration of the £31.13 test (the equivalent of 52 Swiss Francs [CHF]) after 20 weeks of gestation as an addition to current practice. True-positive and false-negative patients were assumed to develop mild or severe PE, eclampsia, or death. A hybrid research approach was adopted; when available, data for model inputs were obtained from published literature and public databases. Interviews with obstetricians, laboratory managers, and healthcare payers were used to validate model inputs and fill utilization-related data gaps. RESULTS: The model estimates that the costs associated with managing a typical pregnancy are £1,781 per patient when the new test is used versus £2,726 with standard practice. This represents savings of £945 per pregnant woman, if the test is used as a supplementary diagnostic tool. The savings are attributed to the new test's improved performance and its ability to better classify the pregnant patients. CONCLUSIONS: The novel test has the potential to provide substantial cost savings for NHS. Even when the novel test's cost is added to the current cost of care, the benefits exceed the additional cost, driven by the test's ability to reduce the rates of false-positive and false-negative diagnoses compared to current standard of care. Potential study limitations include the use of a pooled average of the individual sensitivities and specificities of currently used tests since no data were available on combination testing, the reliance on clinical trial data versus actual practice, and the use of clinical expert opinion when published data were unavailable.

U turn to venous air embolism.

There is a definitive risk of venous air embolism when the fluid infusion is complete and the drip set is still open in a glass bottle.We have devised a novel way of preventing the chances of air embolism when the fluid in the glass bottle finishes. It really gives a "U" turn to the chances of venous air embolism.