RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prevalence of hemolytic neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (NHB) is not well characterized, and economic burden at the population level is poorly understood. This study evaluated the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and economic burden of hemolytic NHB newborns receiving treatment in U.S. real-world settings. METHODS: This cohort study used administrative claims from 01/01/2011 to 08/31/2017. The treated cohort had hemolytic NHB diagnosis and received phototherapy, intravenous immunoglobulin, and/or exchange transfusions. They were matched with non-NHB newborns who had neither NHB nor related treatments on the following: delivery hospital/area, gender, delivery route, estimated gestational age (GA), health plan eligibility, and closest date of birth within 5 years. Inferential statistics were reported. RESULTS: The annual NHB prevalence was 29.6 to 31.7%; hemolytic NHB, 1.8 to 2.4%; treated hemolytic NHB, 0.46 to 0.55%, between 2011 and 2016. The matched analysis included 1373 pairs ≥35 weeks GA. The treated hemolytic NHB cohort had significantly more birth trauma and hemorrhage (4.5% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.003), vacuum extractor affecting newborn (1.9% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.014), and polycythemia neonatorum (0.8% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) than the matched non-NHB cohort. The treated hemolytic NHB cohort also had significantly longer mean birth hospital stays (4.5 vs. 3.0 days, p < 0.001), higher level 2-4 neonatal intensive care admissions (15.7% vs. 2.4, 15.9% vs. 2.8 and 10.6% vs. 2.5%, respectively, all p < 0.001) and higher 30-day readmission (8.7% vs. 1.7%, p < 0.001). One-month and one-year average total costs of care were significantly higher for the treated hemolytic NHB cohort vs. the matched non-NHB cohort, $14,405 vs. $5527 (p < 0.001) and $21,556 vs. $12,986 (p < 0.001), respectively. The average costs for 30-day readmission among newborns who readmitted were $13,593 for the treated hemolytic NHB cohort and $3638 for the matched non-NHB cohort, p < 0.001. The authors extrapolated GA-adjusted prevalence of treated hemolytic NHB in the U.S. newborn population ≥ 35 weeks GA and estimated an incremental healthcare expenditure of $177.0 million during the first month after birth in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of treated hemolytic NHB was 4.6-5.5 patients per 1000 newborns. This high-risk hemolytic NHB imposed substantial burdens of healthcare resource utilization and incremental costs on newborns, their caregivers, and the healthcare system.
Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/economía , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/epidemiología , Adulto , Cuidados Críticos/economía , Recambio Total de Sangre/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios , Femenino , Edad Gestacional , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Hiperbilirrubinemia Neonatal/terapia , Inmunoglobulinas Intravenosas/uso terapéutico , Recién Nacido , Cobertura del Seguro , Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo Neonatal/economía , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Masculino , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Fototerapia/estadística & datos numéricos , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Background: Opioids are a mainstay for acute pain management, but their side effects can adversely impact patient recovery. Multimodal analgesia (MMA) is recommended for treatment of postoperative pain and has been incorporated in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols. The objective of this quality improvement study was to implement an MMA care pathway as part of an ERAS program for colorectal surgery and to measure the effect of this intervention on patient outcomes and costs. Methods: This pre-post study included 856 adult inpatients who underwent an elective colorectal surgery at three hospitals within an integrated healthcare system. The impact of ERAS program implementation on opioid prescribing practices, outcomes, and costs was examined after adjusting for clinical and demographic confounders. Results: Improvements were seen in MMA compliance (34.0% vs 65.5%, P < 0.0001) and ERAS compliance (50.4% vs 57.6%, P < 0.0001). Reductions in mean days on opioids (4.2 vs 3.2), daily (51.6 vs 33.4 mg) and total (228.8 vs 112.7 mg) morphine milligram equivalents given during hospitalization, and risk-adjusted length of stay (4.3 vs 3.6 days, P < 0.05) were also observed. Conclusions: Implementing ERAS programs that include MMA care pathways as standard of care may result in more judicious use of opioids and reduce patient recovery time.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is an ultra-rare, genetic disorder of heterotopic ossification within soft, connective tissues resulting in limited joint function and severe disability. We present results from an international burden of illness survey (NCT04665323) assessing physical, quality of life (QoL), and economic impacts of FOP on patients and family members. METHODS: Patient associations in 15 countries invited their members to participate; individuals with FOP and their family members were eligible. The survey was available online, in 11 languages, from 18 January-30 April 2021. Participants responded to assessments measuring joint function, QoL, healthcare service and living adaptation utilization, out-of-pocket costs, employment, and travel. RESULTS: The survey received 463 responses (patients, n = 219; family members, n = 244). For patients, decreased joint function was associated with reduced QoL and greater reliance on living adaptations. Nearly half of primary caregivers experienced a mild to moderate impact on their health/psychological wellbeing. Most primary caregivers and patients (≥18 years) reported that FOP impacted their career decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this survey will improve understanding of the impact of FOP on patients and family members, which is important for identifying unmet needs, optimizing care, and improving support for the FOP community.
Asunto(s)
Miositis Osificante , Osificación Heterotópica , Humanos , Miositis Osificante/terapia , Calidad de Vida , Familia , Enfermedades Raras , Costo de EnfermedadRESUMEN
Reducing the amount of donor skin needed for definitive wound closure can improve outcomes in patients with severe burns. This Delphi Consensus Panel (DCP) aimed to achieve expert consensus on the percentage reduction in donor skin for autograft that constitutes a clinically meaningful benefit. A two-round DCP of fifteen US burn surgeons was conducted via a web-based survey platform. Fourteen panelists (93.3%) completed both rounds. In Round 2, consensus, defined as ≥70% agreement, was achieved for five of the seven consensus statements. All panelists agreed that a clinically meaningful reduction in the amount of donor skin required would facilitate wound management and decrease donor site morbidity experienced by patients. Furthermore, based on three treatment scenarios, consensus was achieved for a clinically meaningful reduction in the amount of donor skin required for autograft for the adult population in deep partial-thickness and full-thickness burns. Findings from this DCP indicate that an innovative cellular and/or tissue product that would reduce the needed amount of donor skin, by the identified thresholds, has the potential to improve the outcomes for patients with severe burn injuries in a meaningful way.
Asunto(s)
Quemaduras , Trasplante de Piel , Adulto , Autoinjertos , Quemaduras/cirugía , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Humanos , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Cirujanos , Trasplante AutólogoRESUMEN
Evidence-based public health translation of research to practice is essential to improve the public's health. Dissemination and implementation researchers have explored what happens once practitioners adopt evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and have developed models and frameworks to describe the adaptation process. This scoping study identified and summarized adaptation frameworks in published reports and grey literature. We followed the recommended steps of a scoping study: (a) identifying the research question; (b) identifying relevant studies; (c) selecting studies; (d) charting the data; (e) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (f) consulting with experts. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL databases for articles referencing adaptation frameworks for public health interventions in the published and gray literature, and from reference lists of framework articles. Two reviewers independently coded the frameworks and their steps and identified common steps. We found 13 adaptation frameworks with 11 program adaptation steps: (a) assess community, (b) understand the EBI(s), (c) select the EBI, (d) consult with experts, (e) consult with stakeholders, (f) decide on needed adaptations, (g) adapt the original EBI, (h) train staff, (i) test the adapted materials, (j) implement the adapted EBI, and (k) evaluate. Eight of these steps were recommended by more than five frameworks: #1-3, 6-7, and 9-11. This study is the first to systematically identify, review, describe, and summarize frameworks for adapting EBIs. It contributes to the literature by consolidating key steps in program adaptation of EBIs and describing the associated tasks in each step.
Asunto(s)
Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/métodos , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia/métodos , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)/organización & administración , Salud Pública/normas , Difusión de Innovaciones , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/clasificación , Implementación de Plan de Salud/métodos , Humanos , Salud Sexual/tendencias , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Postoperative pain remains difficult to control after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While various modalities have been used, they have been associated with several side effects. For example, opioids have many side effects including: sedation, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, constipation, respiratory depression, and can lead to dependency. Recently, intravenous (IV) acetaminophen has been introduced as a method to manage postoperative pain. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the postoperative outcomes of TKA patients who received oral acetaminophen versus IV acetaminophen. Specifically, this study evaluated: (1) the hospital lengths of stay (LOS) and (2) discharge dispositions. The Premier Database was used to review patients who underwent TKA from 2012 to 2015. A total of 134,216 TKA patients received oral acetaminophen, whereas 56,475 TKA patients received IV acetaminophen postoperatively. LOS were calculated as the number of days from the date of hospital admission to the date of discharge, and the discharge disposition was categorized as to home or to a skilled nursing facility (SNF). Compared with the oral group, the IV acetaminophen group had a 0.14 days shorter LOS (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.15 to -0.13; p < 0.001) and 22% higher chance of being discharged home (odds ratio [OR] = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.19-1.25; p < 0.001). Also, compared with the oral group, the IV group had a 13% lower chance of being discharged to a SNF (OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.90; p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that TKA patients who received IV acetaminophen were associated with a significantly shorter hospital LOS as well as being discharged home and fewer patients had to go to SNF. This may lead to a reduction in the total cost of health care, while, at the same time, decreasing the resource use in patients who undergo TKA.
Asunto(s)
Acetaminofén/administración & dosificación , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/administración & dosificación , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Administración Oral , Anciano , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Infusiones Intravenosas , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor Postoperatorio/prevención & control , Alta del Paciente , Instituciones de Cuidados Especializados de Enfermería/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Utilization of opioid-free analgesia (OFA) for post-surgical pain is a growing trend to counter the risks of opioid abuse and opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs). However, utilization patterns of OFA have not been examined. In this study, we investigated the utilization patterns and predictors of OFA in a surgical population in the United States. METHODS: Analysis of the Cerner Health Facts database (January 2011 to December 2015) was conducted to describe hospital and patient characteristics associated with OFA. Baseline characteristics, such as age, gender, race, discharge status, year of admission and chronic comorbidities at index admission were collected. Hospital characteristics and payer type at index admission were collected as reported in the electronic health record database. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to identify statistically significant predictors of OFA on patient and institutional levels. RESULTS: The study identified 10,219 patients, from 187 hospitals, who received post-surgical OFA and 255,196 patients who received post-surgical opioids. OFA rates varied considerably by hospital. Patients more likely to receive OFA were older (OR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.03, 1.10]; p < .001), or had neurological disorders (OR = 1.24, 95% CI [1.10, 1.39]; p < .001), diabetes (OR = 1.20, 95% CI [1.08, 1.33]; p = .001) or psychosis (OR = 1.18, 95% CI [1.01, 1.37]; p = .030). Patients with obesity and depression were less likely to receive OFA (OR = 0.80, 95% CI [0.67, 0.95]; p = .010 OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 0.98]; p = .030, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Use of post-surgical OFA was limited overall and was not favored in some patient groups prone to ORADEs, indicating missed opportunities to reduce opioid use and ORADE incidence. A substantial proportion of OFA patients was contributed by a few hospitals with especially high rates of OFA, suggesting that hospital policies, institutional structure and cross-functional departmental commitment to reducing opioid use may play a large role in the implementation of OFA.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/administración & dosificación , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Analgésicos Opioides/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of hysterectomy patients who received standard pain management including IV acetaminophen (IV APAP) versus oral APAP. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database (January 2012 to September 2015) comparing hysterectomy patients who received postoperative pain management including IV APAP to those who received oral APAP starting on the day of surgery and continuing up to the third post-operative day, with no exclusions based on additional pain management. We compared the groups on length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, and average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED). The quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital was used as an instrumental variable in two-stage least squares regressions also adjusting for patient demographics, clinical risk factors, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 22,828 hysterectomy patients including 14,811 (65%) who had received IV APAP. Study subjects averaged 50 and 52 years of age, respectively in the IV APAP and oral APAP cohorts and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians (≥60% in both cohorts). Instrumental variable models found IV APAP associated with 0.8 days shorter hospitalization (95% CI: -0.92 to -0.68, p<0.0001) and $2,449 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI: -$2,902 to -$1,996, p<0.0001). Average daily MED trended lower without statistical significance (-1.41 mg, 95% CI: -3.43 mg to 0.61 mg, p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to oral APAP, managing post-hysterectomy pain with IV APAP is associated with shorter LOS and lower total hospitalization costs.
Asunto(s)
Acetaminofén/administración & dosificación , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/administración & dosificación , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Acetaminofén/efectos adversos , Acetaminofén/economía , Administración Intravenosa , Administración Oral , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/efectos adversos , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/economía , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Histerectomía , Pacientes Internos , Enfermedades Intestinales/etiología , Modelos Logísticos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades Uterinas/cirugíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (APAP) vs oral APAP use as adjunctive analgesics in cholecystectomy patients by comparing associated hospital length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, opioid use, and rates of nausea/vomiting, respiratory depression, and bowel obstruction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database (January 2012 to September 2015) including cholecystectomy patients who received either IV APAP or oral APAP. Differences in LOS, hospitalization costs, mean daily morphine equivalent dose (MED), and potential opioid-related adverse events were estimated. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for the binary outcomes and instrumental variable regressions, using the quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital as the instrument in two-stage least squares regressions for continuous outcomes. Models were adjusted for patient demographics, clinical risk factors, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Among 61,017 cholecystectomy patients, 31,133 (51%) received IV APAP. Subjects averaged 51 and 57 years of age, respectively, in the IV and oral APAP cohorts. In the adjusted models, IV APAP was associated with 0.42 days shorter LOS (95% CI = -0.58 to -0.27; p < .0001), $1,045 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI = -$1,521 to -$569; p < .0001), 2 mg lower average daily MED (95% CI = -3 mg to -0.9 mg; p = .0005), and lower rates of respiratory depression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.82-0.97; p = .006), and nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.86-0.86; p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients having cholecystectomy, the addition of IV APAP to perioperative pain management is associated with shorter LOS, lower costs, reduced opioid use, and less frequent nausea/vomiting and respiratory depression compared to oral APAP. These findings should be confirmed in a prospective study comparing IV and oral APAP.
Asunto(s)
Acetaminofén , Colecistectomía/efectos adversos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Dolor Postoperatorio , Acetaminofén/administración & dosificación , Acetaminofén/economía , Administración Intravenosa , Administración Oral , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/administración & dosificación , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/economía , Colecistectomía/métodos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/métodos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Postoperatorio/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Post-surgical pain impacts many patient outcomes. Effective pain management increasingly relies on multimodal analgesia regimens in which acetaminophen (APAP) is a key component. The aim of our study was to examine the impact of oral APAP versus intravenous (IV) APAP as a component of post-surgical pain management after Cesarean sections and hysterectomies. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Cerner HealthFacts® database (from January, 2011 to December, 2015) was conducted to compare outcomes of Cesarean section and hysterectomy surgery patients who received oral APAP to those who received IV APAP post-surgically. Length of stay (LOS), daily morphine milligram equivalent (MME) consumption, the presence of potential opioid-related adverse events (ORADEs), and total pharmacy costs were assessed. Adjusted results were derived using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment (IPW-RA) estimators based on covariates that included demographics, comorbidities, patient clinical characteristics, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: The study identified 29,124 Cesarean section patients (24,612 oral APAP; 4,512 IV APAP) and 9,767 hysterectomy surgery patients (5,586 oral APAP; 4,181 IV APAP). Compared to the oral APAP group, the IV APAP group had reductions in adjusted LOS (Cesarean section: -11.7% days (P < 0.001), hysterectomy: -11.8% days (P = 0.005)), lowered adjusted daily MME consumption from day 0 to day 3 (Cesarean section: -1.6 mg (P < 0.001), hysterectomy: -1.7 mg (P = 0.014)), and reduced risk of ORADEs for Cesarean sections (relative risk of 0.45, P < 0.001). Total pharmacy costs were not significantly different between the two APAP groups. CONCLUSIONS: Post-surgical pain managed with IV APAP in patients undergoing Cesarean section or hysterectomy was associated with shorter LOS, reduced risk of ORADEs, and lower opioid consumption compared to patients managed with oral APAP, without adversely impacting total pharmacy costs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recovery from spine surgery is oriented toward restoring functional health outcomes while reducing resource use. Optimal pain management is a key to reaching these objectives. We compared outcomes of spine surgery patients who received standard pain management including intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (APAP) vs. oral APAP. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier database (January 2012 to September 2015) comparing spine surgery patients who received pain management with IV APAP to those who received oral APAP, with no exclusions based on additional pain management. We performed multivariable logistic regression for the discharge and all cause 30-day readmission to the same hospital outcomes and instrumental variable regressions using the quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital as the instrument in two-stage least squares regressions for length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, and average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED) outcomes. Models adjusted for age, gender, race, admission type, 3M All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group severity of illness and risk of mortality, hospital size, and indicators for whether the hospital was an academic center and whether it was urban or rural. RESULTS: We identified 112,586 spine surgery patients with 51,835 (46%) having received IV APAP. Subjects averaged 57 and 59 years of age respectively in the IV APAP and oral APAP cohorts and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians and female. In our adjusted models, IV APAP was associated with 0.68 days shorter LOS (95% CI: -0.76 to -0.59, p < .0001), $1175 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI: -$1611 to -$739, p < .0001), 13 mg lower average daily MED (95% CI: -14 mg to -12 mg, p < .0001), 34% lower risk of discharge to a skilled nursing facility (95% CI: 0.63 to 0.69, p < .0001), and 13% less risk of 30-day readmission (95% CI: 0.73 to 1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to oral APAP, managing post-spine-surgery pain with IV APAP is associated with less resource use, lower costs, lower doses of opioids, and improved discharge status.