Cost of Health Care

28 Apr

Posted at 22:07h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_23876" align="alignleft" width="200"]Andrew L. Pecora, M.D., F.A.C.P., C.P.E. Chief Innovation Officer Professor and Vice President of Cancer Services President of Regional Cancer Care Associates COTA founder and executive chairman, and chief innovations officer and vice president of cancer services at Hackensack University Medical Center Dr. Andrew Pecora[/caption] Andrew L. Pecora, M.D., F.A.C.P., C.P.E.
COTA Founder and Executive Chairman
Chief Innovations Officer and Vice President of Cancer Services at Hackensack University Medical Center
  Background: Key leadership of health care informatics company, COTA, Inc., will travel to Vatican City after being invited to speak at The Vatican’s Third International Conference on the Progress of Regenerative Medicine and Its Cultural Impact. COTA’s founder, Dr. Andrew Pecora, will discuss health care inequality and how new therapies only exacerbate the problem due to high costs. He will talk about the approaches COTA takes to address the problem, increasing access and affordability.  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background and mission of COTA? Dr. Pecora: Right now, up to 30 percent of health care delivered in the United States is not ideal, meaning doctors are providing treatments that do not necessarily need to be provided or do not precisely align with what is best for the client – a factor called ‘adverse variance.’ The fundamental problem we’re facing today is that we haven’t been able to successfully recognize and predict adverse variance. This is an issue that the entire world is dealing with, and COTA’s mission is to remove that variance and make the best care completely clear to patients, doctors, hospitals, payers and the government. COTA’s aim is to ensure patients are getting the best possible care, leading to the best possible outcome at the best possible price.

20 Apr

Posted at 20:18h in Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Cost of Health Care, Radiology
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_23626" align="alignleft" width="142"]Dr. Christine Fisher MD, MPH Department of Radiation Oncology University of Denver Dr. Christine Fisher[/caption] Dr. Christine Fisher MD, MPH Department of Radiation Oncology University of Denver MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Dr. Fisher: Screenable cancers are treated by oncologists every day, including many in invasive, advanced, or metastatic settings.  We aimed to determine how health insurance status might play into this, with the hypothesis that better access to health care would lead to presentation of earlier cancers.  While this sounds intuitive, there is much debate over recent expansions in coverage through the Affordable Care Act and how this may impact health in our country. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Dr. Fisher: The findings confirm that those without health insurance present with more advanced disease in breast, cervix, colorectal, and prostate cancers, including tumor stage, grade and elevated tumor markers.  That is to say, all else being equal for risk of cancer, lack of health insurance was an independent risk factor for advanced presentation. 

06 Apr

Posted at 19:29h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Heart Disease, NYU/NYMC
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_14972" align="alignleft" width="120"]Joseph A. Ladapo, MD, PhD Assistant Professor of Medicine Section on Value and Effectiveness Department of Population Health NYU School of Medicine Dr. Joseph Ladapo[/caption] Joseph A. Ladapo, MD, PhD Assistant Professor of Medicine and Population Health Section on Value and Effectiveness Department of Population Health NYU Langone School of Medicine New York NY 10016 MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Dr. Ladapo: While cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are increasingly used to treat patients with arrhythmias, heart failure, and other risk factors for sudden cardiac death, these implantable devices require life-long follow-up to assess their performance and functionality. This need for continuous monitoring has galvanized the development of remote monitoring technologies for patients with CIEDs. Although randomized studies have shown that remote monitoring may reduce healthcare utilization and expenditures when compared to in-office monitoring, little is known about whether these findings generalize to day-to-day clinical practice. We aimed to address this uncertainty by evaluating healthcare utilization and expenditures in a cohort of patients with newly-implanted CIEDs who were followed remotely or with in-office monitoring. MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Dr. Ladapo: Remote monitoring is associated with a reduction in patients’ utilization of ambulatory and acute care and a reduction in expenditures associated with this utilization—at least over 24 months. This reduction was most pronounced among remotely monitored patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).  Although many of our comparisons between remote and office monitoring were not statistically significant, they trended toward favoring remote monitoring.

05 Apr

Posted at 21:14h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Heart Disease, JACC
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_23181" align="alignleft" width="133"]Dr. Jordan B. King Post Doctoral Fellow Pharmacotherapy Outcome Resctr, University of Utah Dr. Jordan B. King[/caption] Dr. Jordan B. King Post Doctoral Fellow Pharmacotherapy Outcome Resctr, University of Utah MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The cornerstone of treatment in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) revolves around low-cost generic medications such as angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and beta-blockers (BBs). However, recently the dual-acting angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril-valsartan, demonstrated improved survival and reduction in heart failure hospitalizations relative to enalapril, an ACEI, and optimal background therapy. This creates a situation in which we have a new medication which improves outcomes, but carries a high price tag ($4,560 per year) compared with ACEIs, the standard of care over the last 20 years, and are available as generic medications for <$50 per year. We set out to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality adjusted life year gained (QALY) from the perspective of a health care payer in the U.S. The ICER is a measure of how much we have to pay for sacubitril-valsartan to gain 1 unit of health relative to enalapril. In this case the unit of health is a year of life adjusted for quality. We used a Markov model to estimate the costs and effectiveness of the two treatment options over a lifetime. In the base case, the ICER for sacubitril-valsartan was $50,959 per QALY gained. Health care interventions which cost <$50,000 per QALY are generally considered cost-effective, but some argue that <$100,000 per QALY is a more appropriate threshold in the U.S. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 57% and 80% of all simulations fell below the $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY thresholds, respectively. Sacubitril-valsartan was the less costly treatment arm in 5% of simulations, and enalapril dominated (less costly and more effective) in 17% of simulations.

04 Apr

Posted at 23:37h in Annals Internal Medicine, Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
[caption id="attachment_23142" align="alignleft" width="200"]Quinn Grundy, Dr. Quinn Grundy[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Quinn Grundy, PhD, RN Postdoctoral Research Associate Charles Perkins Centre Faculty of Pharmacy The University of Sydney MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Dr. Grundy: In 2010, United States (US) lawmakers passed the Physician Payments Sunshine Act as part of the Affordable Care Act. The goal of this legislation was to make publicly transparent the financial relationships between physicians and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. These relationships are associated with increased prescribing of high cost, brand name medications with limited track records for safety. Policymakers hoped that increased transparency would help to deter relationships between physicians and industry that could bias treatment decision-making in this way. What caught our attention was that nurses, though they represent the largest proportion of health professionals, are omitted from the US Sunshine legislation. We questioned whether policymakers believed that nurses did not have the same kinds of relationships with industry as their physician counterparts, or, whether they did not believe that the consequences of nurse-industry interactions would warrant regulation. Rather than assuming that nurses interacted with industry in the same way that physicians do, we conducted an exploratory, in-depth qualitative study of nurses’ interactions with industry representatives in day-to-day clinical practice. At 4 hospitals in the western US, we interviewed 72 nurses, hospital administrators, supply chain professionals and industry representatives. Over a period of 2 years, we also directly observed nurses’ interactions with what we call “medically-related” industry, including pharmaceutical, medical equipment and device, infant formula, and health technology companies.

04 Apr

Posted at 18:29h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Hospital Readmissions, Outcomes & Safety, UT Southwestern
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Oanh Kieu Nguyen, MD, MAS | Assistant Professor UT Southwestern Medical Center Divisions of General Internal Medicine and Outcomes and Health Services Research Dallas, TXOanh Kieu Nguyen, MD, MAS | Assistant Professor UT Southwestern Medical Center Divisions of General Internal Medicine and Outcomes and Health Services Research Dallas, TX MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Nguyen: The impetus for this study was Steven Brill’s 2013 Time magazine award-winning article, “Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us.” This report investigated inflated charges for hospital bills, and and suggested that a major driver of irrationally high charges was the disproportionate negotiating power of hospitals, as evidenced through their high profit margins. As hospital physicians, our reaction was “But what if hospitals that make more money are delivering more value and better outcomes to patients? If that’s the case, wouldn’t most people say that their profits justifiably earned?” Surprisingly, we found that no one had really looked at this issue in a systematic way. We set out to answer this question using hospital financial data from California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) and outcomes data on 30-day readmissions and mortality for congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction (‘heart attacks’), and pneumonia from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare website. California has more hospitals than any other state other than Texas, and also has a wide diversity of hospital types. The OSHPD financial data are also audited, so we thought these would be more reliable than using data from other sources. Because the outcomes reported on Hospital Compare are viewable by the general public, we thought hospitals would be most motivated to target improvements in these outcomes. We found that there was almost no association between how much money a hospital made and its subsequent performance on outcomes. The exception to this was we found that hospitals that had better finances reported higher rates of 30-day mortality for congestive heart failure, which was counterintuitive. We’re not sure why this was the case but speculate that it is possible that hospitals with better finances take care of sicker heart failure patients because they have more advanced (and more expensive) treatments available. Additionally, we looked to see if hospitals with lower readmissions rates subsequently made less money. This is a specific area of policy concern given federal penalties in the U.S. for excessive hospital readmissions. Many critics of these penalties have argued that reducing readmissions makes no financial sense for hospitals, since readmissions still generate hospital revenue despite the penalties. Thus, reducing readmissions would reduce a key source of hospital revenue and lead to poorer hospital finances. However, our analysis showed that lower readmissions rates were not associated with poorer hospital finances, as has been feared. 

30 Mar

Posted at 11:23h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, JAMA, Prostate Cancer
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: HICOR portraits, Nov. 4, 2014 Joshua A. Roth, PhD, MHA Assistant Member AHRQ Patient-Centered Outcomes Research K12 Scholar Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes ResearchJoshua A. Roth, PhD, MHA Assistant Member AHRQ Patient-Centered Outcomes Research K12 Scholar Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Roth: PSA prostate cancer screening is controversial because of uncertainty about the overall benefit-risk balance of screening and conflicting recommendations from a variety of prominent national panels. For example, there is debate about whether the cancer early-detection benefits of screening outweigh potential harms related to overdiagnosis of prostate cancer and associated overtreatment (for example, surgery and/or radiation therapy). However, this benefit-risk balance largely depends on how screening programs are structured (for example, the age range over which screening occurs, how often screened occurs, and the PSA level that triggers biopsies) and how screening detected prostate cancers are managed. With these factors in mind, we developed a simulation model to estimate the morbidity, mortality, and cost outcomes of many PSA screening approaches that have been proposed by national panels or discussed in the peer-reviewed literature. The model calculates these outcomes using inputs from national databases and major PSA screening clinical trials. The primary outcome of our model was the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained—a measure that reflects the value of medical interventions through impacts on cost, survival, and health-related quality of life. We don’t have explicit rules for willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year in the United States, but interventions that cost $100,000 to $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year are generally considered to be of at least low to moderate value (whereas, for example, an intervention that costs $400,000 per quality-adjusted life year would be generally considered to be of very poor value). Using the model, we found that more conservative PSA screening strategies (that is, those with less frequent screening and higher PSA level thresholds for biopsy referral) tended to be more cost-effective than less conservative strategies. Importantly, we found that no strategy was likely to be of high value under contemporary treatment patterns where many men with low-risk prostate cancer (that is, those with a Gleason score lower than 7 and clinical T2a stage cancer or lower) receive treatment with surgery or radiation therapy, but several strategies were likely to be of at least moderate value (cost per qualityadjusted life-year=$70 831-$136 332) with increased use of conservative management (that is, treating only after clinical progression) for low-risk, screen-detected cancers.

14 Mar

Posted at 17:33h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Steffie Woolhandler MD, MPH, FACP and David U. Himmelstein MD, FACP CUNY School of Public Health at Hunter College MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The Cadillac Tax aims to eventually eliminate tax subsides to employer-sponsored coverage.  When an employer provides health benefits to an employee, the employee pays no income or FICA tax on the value of those benefits, although the benefits are obviously part of the employee's compensation.  In other words, the taxpayers are currently picking up part of the employee's health insurance costs. Economists and politicians have been justifying the ACA's Cadillac Tax by portraying it as a "Robin Hood" tax that would take from the rich and give to the poor. That view of the Cadillac Tax is untrue.   We found that the main beneficiaries of the current tax subsidies to employer sponsored coverage are middle class families (defined by a family income between $39,000 and $100,000 in 2009 dollars) for whom the subsidies boost their effective income by about 5%.   These middle class people are the ones who would be most harmed when the Cadillac Tax kicks-in and curtails the current tax subsidies.

14 Mar

Posted at 12:15h in Author Interviews, Cancer, Cancer Research, Cost of Health Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22590" align="alignleft" width="93"]Hrishikesh Kale School of Pharmacy Virginia Commonwealth University Hrishikesh Kale[/caption] Hrishikesh Kale School of Pharmacy Virginia Commonwealth University MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The cost of cancer care in the United States is extremely high and escalating every year. Because of increased cost sharing, patients are paying higher out-of-pocket costs for their treatments. Along with high medical expenses, cancer survivors face problems such as loss of employment and reduced productivity. It has been well-established in the literature that because of high out-of-pocket costs, many cancer survivors forgo or delay medical care and mental health-related services and avoid filling prescriptions. This puts their physical and mental health at risk. A related issue is the growing number of cancer survivors in the U.S. As of January 2014, there were approximately 14.5 million cancer survivors in the U.S. By 2024, this number is expected to reach 19 million as a result of improved survival among patients with cancer along with an aging population. Therefore, we decided to investigate the prevalence and sources of financial problems reported by a nationally representative sample of cancer survivors from the 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We also studied the impact of cancer-related financial burden on survivors’ health-related quality of life and psychological health.

08 Mar

Posted at 02:11h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Social Issues
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22448" align="alignleft" width="200"]Dr. LeaAnne DeRigne MSW Ph.D. FAU School of Social Work Dr. LeaAnne DeRigne[/caption] Dr. LeaAnne DeRigne MSW Ph.D. FAU School of Social Work MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. DeRigne: 49 million U.S. employees work without paid sick leave, causing an even greater divide in health care disparities as well as undesirable health care outcomes.   This study examined the relationship between paid sick leave benefits and delays in medical care and forgone medical care for both working adults and their family members. We also analyzed the risk of emergency department use and the risk of missing work because of illness or injury by paid sick leave status, as well as the interaction effects between paid sick leave and family income and health insurance.

07 Mar

Posted at 16:30h in Author Interviews, Brigham & Women's - Harvard, Cost of Health Care, Hand Washing, Health Care Systems, JAMA, UCSF
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22366" align="alignleft" width="133"]Dr. Andrew Auerbach MD Professor of Medicine in Residence Director of Research Division of Hospital Medicine UCSF Dr. Andrew Auerbach[/caption] Dr. Andrew Auerbach MD Professor of Medicine in Residence Director of Research Division of Hospital Medicine UCSF and [caption id="attachment_22367" align="alignleft" width="100"]Jeffrey L. Schnipper, MD, MPH Associate Physician, Brigham and Women's Hospital Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School Department of Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital Dr. Jeffrey Scnhipper[/caption] Jeffrey L. Schnipper, MD, MPH Associate Physician, Brigham and Women's Hospital Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School Department of Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital     MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: The Affordable Care Act required the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a program to reduce what has been dubbed a “revolving door of re-hospitalizations.” Effective October 2012, 1 percent of every Medicare payment was deducted for a hospital that was determined to have excessive readmissions. This percentage has subsequently increased to up to 3 percent. Penalties apply to readmitted Medicare patients with some heart conditions, pneumonia, chronic lung disease, and hip and knee replacements. Unfortunately, few data exist to guide us in determining how many readmissions are preventable, and in those cases how they might have been prevented. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Response: Our main findings were that 27 percent of readmissions were preventable, and that the most common contributors to readmission were being discharged too soon, poor coordination between inpatient and outpatient care providers, particularly in the Emergency Departments and in arranging post acute care.

04 Mar

Posted at 00:58h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Medicare, NYU/NYMC, Orthopedics
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22312" align="alignleft" width="200"]Richard Iorio, MD Dr. William and Susan Jaffe Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery Chief of the Division of Adult Reconstructive Surgery NYU Langone Medical Center Dr. Richard Iorio[/caption] Richard Iorio, MD Dr. William and Susan Jaffe Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery Chief of the Division of Adult Reconstructive Surgery NYU Langone Medical Center  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Iorio: NYU Langone Medical Center’s Department of Orthopaedic Surgery realized early that alternate payment strategies based on value rather than volume were going to be increasing in prevalence and represent the future of compensation strategies  As leaders in orthopaedics, we knew that we must embrace this change and develop strategies and effective protocols to successfully navigate this alternative payment universe. In 2011, NYU Langone’s Hospital for Joint Diseases was chosen as a pilot site for CMS’s Bundled Payment Care Initiative, focusing on Medicare patients undergoing a total joint replacement. Beginning in 2013, we implemented protocols developed at our hospital focusing on preoperatiive patient selection criteria in an effort to ensure better outcomes for Medicare patients who underwent total joint replacements. Under a bundled payment program, hospitals assume financial responsibility for any complications over the entire episode of care 90 days after surgery, including postsurgical infections and hospital readmissions. We compared year over year outcomes from year 1 to year 3 of this program, and found:
  • Average hospital length of stay decreased from 3.58 days to 2.96 days;
  • Discharges to inpatient rehabilitation or care facilities decreased from 44 percent to 28 percent;
  • Average number of readmissions at 30 days decreased from 7 percent to 5 percent; from 11 percent to 6.1 percent at 60 days; and from 13 percent to 7.7 percent at 90 days;
  • The average cost to CMS of the episode of care decreased from $34,249 to $27,541 from year one to year three of the program.

25 Feb

Posted at 13:27h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Health Care Systems, Hospital Readmissions, Technology
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22021" align="alignleft" width="200"]Andrey Ostrovsky, MD CEO | Co-Founder Care at Hand Dr. Andrey Ostrovsky[/caption] Andrey Ostrovsky, MD CEO | Co-Founder Care at Hand  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Dr. Ostrovsky: Hospital readmissions are a large source of wasteful healthcare spending, and current care transition models are too expensive to be sustainable. One way to circumvent cost-prohibitive care transition programs is complement nurse-staffed care transition programs with those staffed by less expensive nonmedical workers. A major barrier to utilizing nonmedical workers is determining the appropriate time to escalate care to a clinician with a wider scope of practice. The objective of this study is to show how mobile technology can use the observations of nonmedical workers to stratify patients on the basis of their hospital readmission risk.

22 Feb

Posted at 15:38h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Pediatrics
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21916" align="alignleft" width="200"]Joanna Thomson MD MPH Assistant Professor Division of Hospital Medicine Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center Dr. Joanna Thomson[/caption] Joanna Thomson MD MPH Assistant Professor Division of Hospital Medicine Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Children with medical complexity have lifelong and complex illnesses. These children account for a disproportionate amount of pediatric health care use.  The lives of families are affected – both financially and socially.  We sought to characterize the challenges these families face through examination of financial and social hardships. In a cohort of families with children who receive care at Cincinnati Children’s Complex Care Center, four out of five families reported experiencing at least one hardship. The striking frequencies observed, despite relatively high measures of household socioeconomic status, suggest that these families face great challenges.  For example, families frequently experienced the need to borrow money and expected little to no help from family or friends. In order to benchmark the hardships experienced by families of children with medical complexity, we compared the hardships they experienced to those faced by the families of children with asthma in the Greater Cincinnati Asthma Risks Study. After accounting for key demographic and socio-economic differences between the two groups, families of children with medical complexity experienced similar to higher levels of financial and social hardship.  For instance, families of children with medical complexity were over two times as likely to report the inability to pay their rent or mortgage than families of children with asthma.

19 Feb

Posted at 22:54h in Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Cost of Health Care, End of Life Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21847" align="alignleft" width="130"]Melissa Garrido, PhD Assistant Professor / Research Health Science Specialist GRECC, James J Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, NY Brookdale Department of Geriatrics & Palliative Medicine Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY Dr. Melissa Garrido[/caption] Melissa Garrido, PhD Assistant Professor / Research Health Science Specialist GRECC, James J Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, NY Brookdale Department of Geriatrics & Palliative Medicine Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Medical costs for people with serious illnesses are rapidly rising in the United States. Concerns about medical debt and bankruptcy are especially relevant when deciding whether to begin or maintain a treatment that may have limited benefit to a patient’s survival or quality of life. Among patients with advanced cancer, one such decision is the choice of whether to use additional chemotherapy when the disease has not responded to an initial line or lines of chemotherapy. In this study, we used data from a prospective study of patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers to examine the relationship between chemotherapy use at study entry (median of four months before death) and estimated costs of healthcare other than chemotherapy in the last week of life. Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Garrido: Among patients with end-stage cancer, those who received chemotherapy in the months before death had higher estimated costs of care in the last week of life.  We did not find evidence that this relationship was explained by patients’ preferences for care, do-not-resuscitate orders, or discussions of care preferences.

08 Feb

Posted at 13:27h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21388" align="alignleft" width="160"]Peter M. Yarbrough MD Department of Internal Medicine Division of General Internal Medicine University of Utah Medical Center and George E. Whalen Veteran Affairs Medical Center Salt Lake City, Utah Dr. Peter Yarbrough[/caption] Peter M. Yarbrough MD Department of Internal Medicine Division of General Internal Medicine University of Utah Medical Center and George E. Whalen Veteran Affairs Medical Center Salt Lake City, Utah Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Yarbrough: Waste is a major contributor to healthcare costs, accounting for an estimated $910 billion/year. Part of this waste includes unnecessary testing and routine laboratory testing has been recognized as frequently unnecessary for inpatients with an estimated 30-50% of tests not being needed.  Through implementation of a multifaced quality improvement initiative including accurate cost feedback through the Value Driven Outcomes (VDO) the University of Utah Healthcare Internal Medicine hospitalist group was able to demonstrate a significant reduction in cost per day ($138 to $123) and cost per visit ($618 to $558) without adverse effect on length of stay or 30-day readmissions.  A major component of the intervention included the use of a rounding checklist with discussion of tests required during rounds.  Supporting that common laboratory tests were affected, the analysis showed a significant decrease in the number of BMP, CMP, and CBC tests per day compared to an institutional control.  Estimated cost savings for this intervention were approximately $250,000 over the first year of the intervention.

30 Jan

Posted at 02:08h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Emergency Care
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21141" align="alignleft" width="200"]Jonathan Pinkney MD FRCP Professor of Medicine Plymouth University and Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry Centre for Clinical Trials and Population Studies Plymouth Science Park Phase 1 Honorary Consultant Physician Diabetes and Endocrinology University Medicine Derriford Hospital Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Plymouth UK Prof. Jonathan Pinkney[/caption] Jonathan Pinkney MD FRCP Professor of Medicine Plymouth University and Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry Centre for Clinical Trials and Population Studies Plymouth Science Park Phase 1 Honorary Consultant Physician Diabetes and Endocrinology University Medicine Derriford Hospital Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Plymouth UK Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Dr. Pinkney: The background is that the study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research in response to a call for research on the problem of unscheduled emergency admissions to hospitals in the UK. The rates of patient attendance at emergency departments and subsequent acute admissions to hospitals have risen year on year. Rising numbers of admissions have significant knock-on effects for acute hospitals including crowding in emergency departments, pressures on staffing, and disruption of elective treatment because of high rates of bed occupancy. The increase in admissions has been associated largely with increased short stay admissions. As a result, there has been an increasing view that a significant proportion of acute medical admissions may not be necessary, and in this respect may be said to be avoidable. There had been relatively limited research on how hospitals can best reduce these avoidable admissions. The main aims of the study were to investigate how senior staff in four major acute hospitals in south west England endeavour to avoid unnecessary acute admissions, and to examine a range of different systems in place in different hospitals to avoid unnecessary admissions. We called this project the "3A" or Avoidable Acute Admissions study. The 3A study was a mixed methods study with a strong emphasis on the narrative experience of patients, carers and healthcare professionals in the emergency departments and associated units of these four acute hospitals. The quantitative component of the study was an application of Value Stream Mapping (VSM), a technique from lean theory, and this was used to identify and measure points of delay in the patient journey.

29 Jan

Posted at 22:23h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Nutrition
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21138" align="alignleft" width="189"]Rajan Anthony Sonik Lurie Institute for Disability Policy Heller School for Social Policy and Management Brandeis University Waltham, MA Rajan Anthony Sonik[/caption] Rajan Anthony Sonik Lurie Institute for Disability Policy Heller School for Social Policy and Management Brandeis University Waltham, MA Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: We know that food insecurity (experiencing hunger, insufficient food, or concerns about having enough food) is associated with a host of health problems, ranging from behavior health conditions to iron deficiencies. However, understanding the relationship between food insecurity and healthcare utilization and cost patterns has been more difficult to assess with available data. Presumably, rises in food insecurity should worsen health, which in turn should increase healthcare utilization and ultimately costs. To examine this topic, I actually looked at this in the opposite way by asking if a decrease in food insecurity might lead to decrease in costs. The opportunity to do so arose in the form of the April 2009 increase in benefit levels for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP; formerly the Food Stamps Program) that were part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (commonly referred to as the “stimulus package”). SNAP has been shown to alleviate food insecurity, and so this increase in benefits created the chance to explore my question. I analyzed Massachusetts data from October 2006 to August 2012 using interrupted time series models and found that inpatient Medicaid cost growth in Massachusetts fell by 73% (p = 0.003) after the increase in SNAP benefits. Moreover I found that decreased admissions were the primary driver of this outcome rather any patterns in health care inflation. In addition, I found that, for people with selected chronic illnesses that create heightened sensitivity to food insecurity, the drop in cost growth was even greater (the diseases studied were sickle cell disease, diabetes, malnutrition/failure to thrive, inflammatory bowel disease, asthma, and cystic fibrosis).

28 Jan

Posted at 21:31h in Author Interviews, Cognitive Issues, Cost of Health Care, Geriatrics, Heart Disease, Medicare, Social Issues

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_21033" align="alignleft" width="133"] Dr. Mark Ketterer[/caption] Mark W Ketterer PhD, ABPP Health Psychology Henry Ford Hospital Detroit Michigan MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?  Dr. Ketterer:  Reducing wasteful healthcare costs is a high priority For Medicare/Medicaid, Obamacare and all third party payors.  Cognitive impairment (CI) is highly...

15 Jan

Posted at 23:10h in Author Interviews, Columbia, Cost of Health Care, JAMA, Ophthalmology
More on Health Care Costs on MedicalResearch.com MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Alisa Prager BS Bernard and Shirlee Brown Glaucoma Research Laboratory Department of Ophthalmology Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study?  Response: The goal of this research was to better understand the impact of glaucoma on non-ophthalmic healthcare use and costs. While there have been other studies assessing costs associated with glaucoma, these studies were primarily derived from either claims data or chart review. Our study used the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, which is a dataset that links claims data with survey results. The advantage of this is that the survey data allowed us to assess patient reported outcomes that did not necessarily prompt an encounter with the health care system, such as recent falls or feelings of sadness. The MCBS also provides complete expenditure and source of payment data on health services, including those not covered by Medicare, which allowed us to look at a more full spectrum of both private and public healthcare use and costs among Medicare beneficiaries. MedicalResearch: What are the main findings? Response: We found that Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma have 27% higher likelihood of inpatient hospitalizations and home health aide visits compared to those without glaucoma, even after adjusting for covariates and excluding individuals who were admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of glaucoma. When we stratified glaucoma patients based on self-reported visual disability, we found that those with self-reported visual disability were more likely to complain of depression, falls and difficulty walking compared to those without. We also found that glaucoma patients incurred a predicted $2,903 higher mean annual total healthcare costs from all sources compared to those without glaucoma after adjusting for socioeconomic factors and comorbidities. Costs were higher among those who reported visual disability, and remained higher after excluding outpatient payments.

12 Jan

Posted at 03:33h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
[caption id="attachment_20562" align="alignleft" width="180"]Paul Barr MSc, PhD Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Clinical Practice The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice Dr. Paul Barr[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Paul Barr MSc, PhD Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Clinical Practice The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Barr: I belong to the Preference Laboratory, a group of researchers in The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, who focus on research to improve patient engagement in their health care. One of our areas of interest is mental health, especially depression given the high and increasing prevalence of this condition in America and worldwide. Previous research has found that individuals with depression are not fully engaged in the treatment decision making process and may not be aware of their options. Decision aids are short tools that provide information on available treatment options and information about those options that is important to patients and clinicians, which can facilitate greater patient engagement through shared decision making.  To develop these tools, it is important to identify the information important to patients and clinicians when making treatment decisions. By conducting a national survey of individuals with depression and clinicians who treat depression across the US, we found that patients and clinicians felt that the effectiveness of treatment, potential side-effects and time to recovery were important to discuss. However, where patients wanted to know about about cost and insurance coverage of treatment, clinicians did not focus on these priorities. Yet when asked to take the patient’s perspective, clinicians had the same priorities as patients, including cost and insurance coverage. In addition, only 18% of patient respondents reported experiencing a high level of shared decision making on the CollaboRATE survey (www.collaboratescore.org). 

08 Jan

Posted at 17:17h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, JAMA, Stanford, Surgical Research
[caption id="attachment_20506" align="alignleft" width="125"]Sam P. Most, M.D., F.A.C.S. Professor, Departments of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery and Surgery (Division of Plastic Surgery, by courtesy) Chief, Division of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford, CA Dr. Sam Most[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Sam P. Most, M.D., F.A.C.S. Professor, Departments of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery and Surgery (Division of Plastic Surgery, by courtesy) Chief, Division of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford, CA  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Most: Insurance companies often require patients to try a 6 or more week treatment with nasal steroids prior to allowing nasal surgery to proceed. This is true even in cases of physician-documented severe or extreme anatomic nasal obstruction that we know will not respond to medical therapy. We sought to examine this from a cost and quality-of-life perspective. We found that while the up-front cost of surgery is obviously much higher than medical therapy, when viewed from an effect on improvement of quality of life (or lack thereof, in the case of medical therapy), the surgical therapy became more cost effective as years passed by.

07 Jan

Posted at 23:46h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Primary Care
[caption id="attachment_20486" align="alignleft" width="160"]Sapna Kaul, Ph.D Huntsman Cancer Institute 2000 Circle of Hope Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Dr. Sapna Kaul[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Sapna Kaul, Ph.D Huntsman Cancer Institute 2000 Circle of Hope Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Kaul: The United States has the highest healthcare expenditures in the world, and close to one-third of these expenditures are believed to be unnecessary. One potential reason for these unnecessary expenditures is that patients may ask for medical services that are unnecessary. At the same time, primary care physicians (PCP) could find it difficult to refuse to prescribe unnecessary medical services as they may worry that it may compromise patient satisfaction. Also, there is a shortage of primary care workforce in the U.S. and PCPs may have insufficient time to effectively address patient requests. We investigated 2 types of unnecessary medical practices initiated by patient requests: (1) providing unnecessary specialty referrals, and (2) prescribing brand-name drugs when generic alternatives were available. To explore these practices, we used data on 840 U.S. PCPs from a national survey of physicians conducted in 2009. Over 50% of primary care physicians reported providing unnecessary specialty referrals and 39% prescribed brand-name drugs at patient requests. Several provider and organizational factors, such as physician specialty and solo/2-person practice, were related to reporting unnecessary practices.

06 Jan

Posted at 22:20h in AHRQ, Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care
[caption id="attachment_20455" align="alignleft" width="250"]Asako Moriya, Ph.D. Service economist Center for Financing, Access and Cost Trends Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Rockville, Maryland Dr. Asako Moriya[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Asako Moriya, Ph.D. Service economist Center for Financing, Access and Cost Trends Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Rockville, Maryland  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Dr. Moriya: While the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has increased insurance coverage and improved access to care among millions of Americans, the law’s potential impacts on the labor market are also important policy considerations. There was speculation that employers would reduce work hours to avoid the ACA employer mandate and also that ACA coverage expansion through Medicaid and the Health Insurance Marketplace would create work disincentives. We wanted to test these speculations using data from a nationally representative sample of approximately 60,000 households interviewed monthly up until June 2015.

04 Jan

Posted at 19:32h in Author Interviews, Brigham & Women's - Harvard, Cost of Health Care, Medicare, OBGYNE
[caption id="attachment_20403" align="alignleft" width="120"]Dr. Sarah Elizabeth Little, MD Obstetrics/Gynecology Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Brigham and Women's Hospital Dr. Little[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Sarah Elizabeth Little, MD Obstetrics/Gynecology Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Brigham and Women's Hospital Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Little: This study investigates the variation in cesarean delivery rates across hospital services areas (a geographic unit designed by the Dartmouth Atlas to represent local markets for primarily hospital-based medical services). We looked at whether variation in cesarean delivery rates was related to broader variation in overall medical spending and utilization in that area, which we measured with Medicare spending and hospital use at the end-of-life. We found that an area’s cesarean delivery rate was correlated with these other measures; in other words, the hospital services areas that are doing the most cesarean deliveries are the same ones that are spending more and doing more to non-obstetric patients as well.

23 Dec

Posted at 15:27h in Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Colon Cancer, Cost of Health Care, JAMA, Social Issues, University of Michigan
[caption id="attachment_20237" align="alignleft" width="125"]4/23/13 Studio head shot portrait of Christine Veenstra for Hem/Oncol. Dr. Veenstra[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Christine Veenstra MD Clinical Lecturer, Internal Medicine Medical Oncology University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI  48109-5343 MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Veenstra: Patients with cancer face many costs and incur financial burden as they go through diagnosis and treatment. For working patients, cancer diagnosis and treatment may come with the additional burden of time away from work, lost income, and even long-term job loss. Although 40% of US workers do not have access to paid sick leave, we hypothesized that availability of paid sick leave could reduce the need to take unpaid time away from work during cancer treatment and might therefore be associated with job retention and reduced personal financial burden. In a survey of over 1300 patients with Stage III colorectal cancer, we found that only 55% of those who were employed at the time of their cancer diagnosis retained their jobs. Working patients with paid sick leave were nearly twice as likely to retain their jobs compared with working patients who did not have paid sick leave. This held true even when controlling for income, education and health insurance. Furthermore, working patients without paid sick reported significantly higher personal financial burden than those who had paid sick leave available.

18 Dec

Posted at 21:17h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Medicare
MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Thomas Selden, Ph.D. Director of the Division of Research and Modeling Center for Financing, Access, and Cost Trends Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), in Rockville, Maryland.  Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Selden: Spending on hospital care is expected to exceed $1 trillion for the first time in 2015, and it is important to understand the differences between public and private payment rates if we want to achieve the goals of better care, smarter spending, and healthier people – the triple aims found in HHS’ National Quality Strategy.  Our study examined data on inpatient hospital stays between 1996 and 2012, finding that payments to hospitals from private insurers in 2012 were 75 percent greater than Medicare’s – a sharp increase from the approximate 10 percent difference between 1996 and 2001. 

17 Dec

Posted at 01:34h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Emory, Infections, Pharmacology
[caption id="attachment_20151" align="alignleft" width="150"]Carlos del Rio, MD Chair, HIV Medicine Association Department of Medicine Hubert Professor and Chair of the Department of Global Health at the Rollins School of Public Health Professor of Medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases Emory University School of Medicine Dr. Carlos del Rio[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview Questions Carlos del Rio, MD Chair, HIV Medicine Association Department of Medicine Hubert Professor and Chair of the Department of Global Health at the Rollins School of Public Health Professor of Medicine in the Division of Infectious Diseases Emory University School of Medicine MedicalResearch.com Editor's note:  Dr. Carlos del Rio discusses the statement from the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS) regarding the news that Express Scripts is taking steps to improve access to obtaining pyrimethamine for patients with toxoplasmosis. Medical Research: What is the background for this Express Scripts announcement? Dr. del Rio: The HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America initially heard from our members (ID and HIV clinicians) in August about the 5000% price increase in Daraprim® (from $13.50 to $750 per tablet) following Turing Pharmaceuticals’ acquisition of the rights to distribute Daraprim® from Impax Laboratories, Inc.[1] ID and HIV clinicians told us they had been having difficulties obtaining pyrimethamine since earlier in the summer when Impax implemented a controlled distribution system making the drug available only through Walgreen’s Specialty Pharmacy. Despite HIVMA, IDSA and others urging Turing to reverse the price hike, no action was taken and providers continued to report the scarcity of the drug due to the cost and issues with the distribution system. [2] Due to these ongoing challenges, HIVMA and IDSA thought it was important to provide information to our members and other providers regarding the new lower cost option so they could evaluate this option in consultation with their patients. Initially Turing agreed to reconsider the price increase and to lower it; however, on Nov. 24th Turing announced that they would not lower the list price of Daraprim but instead planned to offer discounts of up to 50% to some hospitals. [3] The announcement reinforced the urgent need for affordable treatment options and failed to address that a majority of the eight to twelve month treatment course occurs on an outpatient basis.

16 Dec

Posted at 22:36h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Education, JAMA
[caption id="attachment_20140" align="alignleft" width="200"]Lorette A. Stammen, MD Department of Educational Development and Research Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences Maastricht University, Maastricht The Netherlands Dr. Stammen[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Lorette A. Stammen, MD Department of Educational Development and Research Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences Maastricht University, Maastricht The Netherlands Medical Research: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Stammen: Research indicated that we can improve the quality of care and reduce the health care costs by eliminating health care waste. Health care waste are health care services that are not beneficial to patients. There are many ways to reduce health care waste, like through insurance and government policies modification,  but we were especially interested in how the medical expertise of physicians could improve high-value, cost-conscious care. We conducted a systematic review with the aim of understanding how training programs cause learning among physicians, residents and medical students. We analyzed 79 articles using realist review method and found three important factors that facilitate the learning of physicians (in training).
  • First, educational programs should focus on knowledge transmission. Knowledge that is essential entails knowledge regarding prices and general health economics, scientific evidence, and patient preferences.
  • Besides knowledge, the second factor of training for high-value, cost-conscious care is reflective practice. Reflective practice for example using feedback and asking reflective questions, by peers, colleagues and supervisors to reflect on decisions made in daily practice.
  • The third element of training programs should address an supportive environment in which physicians, residents and medical students learn. A supportive environment is important to cultivate the importance of high-value, cost-conscious care on multiple levels in the health care system. Since physicians are a part of a health care team their training programs should incorporate the training of health care professionals.
  • Furthermore, it is important that role models demonstrate high-value cost-conscious care.

14 Dec

Posted at 20:21h in Author Interviews, Cost of Health Care, Health Care Systems, Pediatrics
[caption id="attachment_20068" align="alignleft" width="261"]Dr. Eric W. Christensen, PhD Health Economist Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN Dr. Eric Christensen[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Eric W. Christensen, PhD Health Economist Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Dr. Christensen: National healthcare expenditures are up from 5.0% of gross domestic product in 1960 to 17.4% in 2013. We must find ways to control cost while maintaining quality. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) were designed to control a population’s health care cost while maintaining or improving quality. This study was an examination of one ACO exclusively covering a pediatric Medicaid population. Medical Research: What are the main findings? Dr. Christensen: We found that health care utilization and cost patterns were associated with the length of time patients were attributed to this ACO, where attribution length can be thought of as a proxy for consistent primary care from ACO providers. Specifically, attribution length of 2 or more years was associated with a 40.6% decrease in inpatient days. This decrease was partially offset by increases in outpatient visits (as one would expect with a primary care focus), emergency department visits, and use of pharmaceuticals. Combined these utilization changes resulted in a cost reduction 15.7% for those attributed 2 or more years. These changes were achieved while meeting quality benchmarks.