Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Health Care Systems, Hospital Readmissions / 20.07.2016
Statewide Collaboration Reduced Preventable Hospital Readmissions by 20%
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
[caption id="attachment_26313" align="alignleft" width="150"]
Dr. Thomas Meehan[/caption]
Thomas P. Meehan, MD, MPH
Associate Medical Director
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
Qualidigm, Wethersfield
Quinnipiac University, North Haven
CT
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: There is a national effort to decrease preventable hospital readmissions in order to improve both the quality and cost of healthcare. Part of this national effort includes local quality improvement projects which are organized and conducted by a variety of organizations working by themselves or with others. We describe one statewide quality improvement project which was led by a Medicare-funded Quality Improvement Organization and conducted with a hospital association and many other collaborators. We document our activities and a relative decrease in the statewide 30-day aggregate readmission rate among fee-for service Medicare beneficiaries of 20.3% over four and a half years. While we are extremely proud of our work and this outcome, we recognize that there are many factors that impacted the outcome and that we can’t claim sole credit.
Dr. Thomas Meehan[/caption]
Thomas P. Meehan, MD, MPH
Associate Medical Director
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
Qualidigm, Wethersfield
Quinnipiac University, North Haven
CT
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: There is a national effort to decrease preventable hospital readmissions in order to improve both the quality and cost of healthcare. Part of this national effort includes local quality improvement projects which are organized and conducted by a variety of organizations working by themselves or with others. We describe one statewide quality improvement project which was led by a Medicare-funded Quality Improvement Organization and conducted with a hospital association and many other collaborators. We document our activities and a relative decrease in the statewide 30-day aggregate readmission rate among fee-for service Medicare beneficiaries of 20.3% over four and a half years. While we are extremely proud of our work and this outcome, we recognize that there are many factors that impacted the outcome and that we can’t claim sole credit.
Dr. Pei-Jung Lin[/caption]
Pei-Jung Lin, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health
Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies
Tufts Medical Center
Boston, MA 02111
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a slow, progressive disease. Many people with AD may live for years with the disease left unrecognized or untreated, in part because the early symptoms are mild and often mistaken as part of normal aging. In this study, we found that Alzheimer’s patients may use more health care services and incur higher costs than those without dementia even before they receive a formal diagnosis. For example, total Medicare expenditures were 42% higher among Alzheimer’s patients than matched controls during the year prior to diagnosis ($15,091 vs. $10,622), and 192% higher in the first year immediately following diagnosis ($27,126 vs. $9,274). We also found similar trends among Medicare patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI)— a prodromal stage of AD and associated with higher dementia risk.
Our study suggests that an Alzheimer’s disease or MCI diagnosis appears to be prompted by other health problems such as cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, pneumonia, renal failure, urinary tract infections, and blood and respiratory infections. This finding likely reflects a failure of ambulatory care related to the impact of cognitive impairment on other chronic conditions.
Dr. Thomas Gaziano[/caption]
Thomas Andrew Gaziano, MD, MSc
Department of Cardiology
Assistant Professor
Harvard Medical School
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of admissions to hospitals in the United States and the associated costs run between $24-47 billion annually. Targeting neurohormonal pathways that aggravate the disease has the potential to reduce admissions. Enalapril, an angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitor (ACEI), is more commonly prescribed to treat HF than Sacubitril/Valsartan, an angiotensin-receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). The latter was shown to reduce cardiovascular death and hospitalizations due to heart failure in a multi-country, randomized clinical (PARADIGM-HF), compared to Enalapril. In order to assess the cost-effectiveness of Sacubitril/Valsartan, compared to Enalapril, in the United States, we created a model population with population characteristics equivalent to the population in the PARADIGM-HF trial. Using a 2-state Markov model we simulated HF death and hospitalizations for patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 40% or less.
Dr. Morgan Freiman[/caption]
J. Morgan Freiman, MD
Infectious disease research fellow
Boston Medical Center
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Freiman: There are 130-150 million persons infected with chronic HCV with 75% of all cases occurring in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). Diagnosis is a 2-step process that starts with screening for exposure with an assay that detects antibodies to HCV (anti-HCV), followed by nucleic acid testing (NAT) for persons with reactive anti-HCV to measure HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) and confirm active viremia.
In LMICs diagnostic capacity is low, and fewer than 1% of patients are aware of their infection. Additionally, a significant proportion of patients who test positive for anti-HCV are lost to follow-up before nucleic acid testing. The 2-step diagnostic process is thus a major bottleneck to the HCV cascade of care. Testing for hepatitis C virus core antigen (HCVcAg) is a potential replacement for NAT.
Our systematic review evaluated the accuracy of diagnosis of active HCV infection among adults and children for 5 commercially available HCVcAg tests compared with NAT. We found that HCVcAg assays with signal amplification have high sensitivity, high specificity, and have the potential to replace NAT in settings with high HCV prevalence.
Dr. Celeste Torio[/caption]
Celeste M. Torio, Ph.D., M.P.H
Scientific Review Officer
AHRQ
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Torio: Hospital care expenditures constitute the largest single component of health care spending. These expenses are of significant concern to policymakers because of their impact on governments, consumers and insurers.
MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings?
• Aggregate hospital costs for 35.6 million hospital stays totaled $381.4 billion in 2013.
• Septicemia, osteoarthritis, newborn infants, complication of device, and acute myocardial infarction are the five most expensive conditions, and account for 1/5 of the total aggregate costs for hospitalizations.
• Sixty-three percent of aggregate hospital costs were covered by Medicare and Medicaid, while 28 percent were covered by private insurance and 5 percent were covered by the uninsured.
Adam Glassman[/caption]
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Adam Glassman, M.S.
Director, DRCRnet Coordinating Center
Jaeb Center for Health Research
Tampa, FL 33647
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is the most common cause of vision loss in patients with diabetes, impairing the vision of approximately 750,000 people in the United States. The most common treatment involves the injection into the eye of one of 3 drugs that inhibit vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network, funded by the National Institutes of Health, conducted a randomized clinical trial on the comparative effectiveness of the 3 anti-VEGF drugs EYLEA®, Avastin®, or Lucentis® for eyes with decreased vision from diabetic macular edema. There are substantial cost differences between the three drugs. In the United States, EYLEA® costs approximately $1850, repackaged (compounded) Avastin® $60, and Lucentis® $1170 per injection. In eyes with relatively good starting vision, there were no differences in vision outcomes; all three groups, on average, had improved vision. In eyes with starting vision of 20/50 or worse, EYLEA® had better vision outcomes at 1 year than either Avastin® or Lucentis®, and better vision outcomes at 2 years than Avastin®. However, given that, on average, eyes will receive 9 to 10 injections within the first year of treatment and 5 injections in the second year, neither EYLEA® nor Lucentis® would be considered cost effective by standard benchmarks compared with Avastin® unless their prices decrease substantially.
Dr. Sarmad Sadeghi[/caption]
Sarmad Sadeghi MD, MS, PhD
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center
University of Southern California
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Sadeghi: Several years ago analyses of outcomes for radical prostatectomy highlighted the significant impact of surgical experience on the oncological outcome for the patients. In this case experience was measured by the number of radical prostatectomies performed by the surgeon, and oncological outcome was measured by treatment failure rates (rising PSA). Despite this data, the move for redirecting patients to “high volume centers” where more experienced surgeons perform the operation has been sluggish. There was insufficient data on what is involved in referring patients to high volume centers and whether or not such action is cost effective.
In a previous study we demonstrated that for every referral to a high volume center, there would be an average of $1,800 over a follow-up period of 20 years in societal cost savings. The main source of these savings is fewer treatment failures.
The next question was who is a good candidate for referral and whether these savings can offset the referral costs.
Dr. Nathalie Moise[/caption]
Nathalie Moise, MD, MS
Assistant Professor
Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health
Department of Medicine
Columbia University Medical Center
New York, NY 10032
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Moise: Our research aimed to compare the number of lives saved and changes in medical costs expected if intensive blood pressure goals of less than 120 mmHg were implemented in high cardiovascular disease risk patients.
In 2014, the 8th Joint National Committee (JNC8) on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure issued new guidelines recommending that physicians aim for a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 140 mmHg in adults with diabetes and/or chronic kidney disease and 150 mmHg in healthy adults over age 60. The new guidelines represented a major departure from previous JNC7 guidelines recommending SBPs of 130 mmHg and 140, mmHg for these groups, respectively. Under the 2014 guidelines, over 5 million fewer individuals annually would receive drug treatment to lower their blood pressure, compared with the prior 2003 guidelines.
Recently, the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) found that having a more intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal of 120 mmHg in patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease reduced both cardiovascular events and mortality by about one quarter, compared with the current goal of 140 mmHg.
These recent studies and guidelines have created uncertainty about the safest, most effective and high-value blood pressure goals for U.S. adults with hypertension, but no prior study has compared the cost-effectiveness of adding more intensive blood pressure goals in high cardiovascular disease risk groups to standard national primary prevention hypertension guidelines like JNC8 and JNC7.
Our team at Columbia University Medical Center conducted a computer simulation study to determine the value of adding the lower, life-saving systolic blood pressure goal identified in SPRINT to the JNC7 and JNC8 guidelines for high-risk patients between the ages of 35 and 74 years. (High risk was defined as existing cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or a 10-year cardiovascular disease risk greater than 15 percent in patients older than 50 years and with a pre-treatment SBP greater than 130 mmHg)
Dr. Darius Lakdawalla[/caption]
Darius Lakdawalla PhD
Quintiles Chair in Pharmaceutical Development and Regulatory Innovation
School of Pharmacy
Professor in the Sol Price School of Public Policy
University of Southern California
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Lakdawalla: New treatments for hepatitis-C are highly effective but also involve high upfront costs. Because they effectively cure the disease, all the costs of treatments are paid over a short period of time – about three months – but the benefits accrue for the rest of a patient’s life. This creates problems for the private health insurance system, where patients switch insurers. The insurer that pays the bill for the treatment might not be around to enjoy the benefits of averting liver damage, liver transplants, and other costly complications associated with hepatitis-C.
Dr. Benjamin D. Sommers[/caption]
Benjamin D. Sommers, MD, PhD
Assistant Professor of Health Policy & Economics
Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health / Brigham & Women's Hospital
Boston, MA 02115
[caption id="attachment_24406" align="alignleft" width="125"]
Molly E. Frean[/caption]
Molly E. Frean
Data Analyst
Department of Health Policy and Management
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
Boston, MA 02115
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Sommers: We conducted this study in an effort to see how Native Americans have fared under the Affordable Care Act. In addition to the law's expansion of coverage via Medicaid and tax credits for the health insurance marketplaces, the law also provided support for Native Americans’ health care specifically through continued funding of the Indian Health Service (IHS). We sought to see how both health insurance coverage patterns and IHS use changed in the first year of the law's implementation.
Jayant S Vaidya MBBS MS DNB FRCS PhD
Professor of Surgery and Oncology,
Scientific Director, Clinical Trials Group,
Division of Surgery and Interventional Science,
University College London
Whittington Health - Clinical Lead for Breast Cancer
Royal Free Hospital
University College London Hospital
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Prof. Vaidya: TARGIT-A randomised clinical trial (
Dr. Yeh[/caption]
Dr. James Song-Jeng Yeh, MD
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Boston MA
MedicalResearch.com: What is the purpose for this study?
Dr. Yeh: A number of factors influence physicians’ prescribing behavior, including physician’s knowledge and understanding of the drugs. Pharmaceutical detailing and financial incentives may affect such behavior. My interest in evidence-based medicine and how medical knowledge is translated into practice lead me to think about how physicians’ financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry may affect prescribing patterns.
In our study, we linked the Massachusetts physicians open payment database with the Medicare drug prescription claims database to determine if financial relationships with the industry are associated with increased brand-name statin drug prescribing. The open payment database reports payments that physicians receive from pharmaceutical and medical device industries. The open payment database when linked to the drug prescription claims database allowed us to answer this question.
We looked at year 2011, when two of the most commonly prescribed brand-name statin drugs (Lipitor and Crestor) were not yet available in generic formulation.
The outcome measured was what percentage of all statin prescription claims (both generic and brand-name) were brand-names.
Dr. E. Scott Sills[/caption]
Dr. Scott Sills MD, PhD
Medical Director at the Center for Advanced Genetics
an IVF program based in Carlsbad, California
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Sills: Often regarded as a miracle procedure by many infertile couples, in vitro fertilization (IVF) can be financially difficult for those without insurance coverage for the treatment. This prohibitive cost leads many would-be parents who pursue IVF to transfer multiple embryos at once, to increase their chances of getting a baby and minimize the need for additional attempts.
This new study now reports that the economic impact of IVF deserves a closer look. As corresponding author E. Scott Sills, MD PhD noted, rates of cesarean-section deliveries, premature births, and low birth weight of babies are all greater with two or more embryos transferred to the mother at once, compared to a lower risk, single-embryo pregnancy.
The data derived from a comprehensive analysis of all IVF cases in Vermont (UVM) and was recently published in the journal Applied Health Economics & Health Policy. It is believed to be the first effort to calculate the difference in infant hospital costs based on the number of embryos transferred. Sills and his team had access to UVM Medical Center records of patients who conceived through IVF and delivered at least 20 weeks into their pregnancies between 2007 and 2011.
Dr. Stacie Dusetzina[/caption]
Stacie B. Dusetzina, PhD
Assistant Professor
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, NC
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Dusetzina: Drug prices are of significant policy interest, particularly the prices for so-called “specialty” medications which are used to treat rare and/or complex conditions like cancer. In this study I estimated monthly price for orally-administered cancer treatments that were approved between 2000 and 2014. First I looked at the price of the drug during the year of initial FDA approval and then I looked at annual changes in the price after the year of approval. The main findings are that, even after inflation adjustment, the monthly price paid for orally-administered cancer treatments is increasing rapidly both at the time of approval and in subsequent years.
As an example, if you compare average monthly prices during the first year post-approval for treatments approved between 2000-2010 to those approved after 2010 there was a major increase in launch prices from $5,529 per month to $9,013 per month. Year-to-year changes in price after launch varied a lot by drug ranging from decreases in price of -2.7% per year to increases of 11.4% per year. However, nearly all of the products studied increased in price over time.
Dr. Andrew Pecora[/caption]
Andrew L. Pecora, M.D., F.A.C.P., C.P.E.
