High variability in self-pay pricing for vasectomy and vasectomy reversal in the United States.

CONTEXT: In the United States (US) men who undergo vasectomy and/or vasectomy reversal (vasovasotomy) are likely to pay out-of-pocket for these procedures. We characterized the publicly disclosed pricing of both procedures with a focus on variability in self-pay prices. METHODS: We queried all US hospitals for publicly disclosed prices of vasectomy and vasovasotomy. We assessed interhospital variability in self-pay pricing and compared hospitals charging high (≥75th percentile) and low (≤25th percentile) self-pay prices for either procedure. We also examined trends in pricing after the 2022 US Supreme Court decision that allowed individual states to ban abortion. RESULTS: Of 6692 hospitals, 1375 (20.5%) and 281 (4.2%) disclosed self-pay prices for vasectomy and vasovasotomy, respectively. There was a 17-fold difference between the 10th and 90th percentile self-pay prices for vasectomy ($421-$7147) and a 39-fold difference for vasovasotomy ($446-$17,249). Compared with hospitals charging low (≤25th percentile) self-pay prices for vasectomy or vasovasotomy, hospitals charging high (≥75th percentile) prices were larger (median 150 vs. 59 beds, p < 0.001) and more likely to be for-profit (31.2% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.001), academic-affiliated (52.7% vs. 23.1%, p < 0.001), and located in an urban zip code (70.1% vs. 41.3%, p < 0.001). From October 2022 to April 2023, the median self-pay price of vasectomy increased by 10% (from $1667 to $1832) while the median self-pay price of vasovasotomy decreased by 16% (from $3309 to $2786). CONCLUSION: We found large variability in self-pay pricing for vasectomy and vasectomy reversal, which may serve as a barrier to the accessibility of male reproductive care.

Disparities in access to robotic technology and perioperative outcomes among patients treated with radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Most radical prostatectomies are completed with robotic assistance. While studies have previously evaluated perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), this study investigates disparities in access and clinical outcomes of RARP. STUDY DESIGN: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients who received radical prostatectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2017 with outcomes through 2018. RARP was compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Odds of receiving RARP were evaluated while adjusting for covariates. Overall survival was evaluated using a propensity-score matched cohort. RESULTS: Overall, 354 752 patients were included with 297 676 (83.9%) receiving RARP. Patients who were non-Hispanic Black (82.8%) or Hispanic (81.3%) had lower rates of RARP than non-Hispanic White (84.0%) or Asian patients (87.7%, p < 0.001). Medicaid or uninsured patients were less likely to receive RARP (75.5%) compared to patients with Medicare or private insurance (84.4%, p < 0.001). Medicaid or uninsured status was associated with decreased odds of RARP in adjusted multivariable analysis (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.76). RARP was associated with decreased perioperative mortality and improved overall survival compared to ORP. CONCLUSION: Patients who were underinsured were less likely to receive RARP. Improved access to RARP may lead to decreased disparities in perioperative outcomes for prostate cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of Early Screening Home Semen Analysis in Couples Attempting to Conceive.

OBJECTIVE: To study the cost-effectiveness of incorporating home semen analysis in screening for oligospermia and expediting time to evaluation. METHODS: A decision analytic model was built using inputs from the medical literature. The index patient is the male partner in a couple seeking fertility, and entry into the model was assumed to be at the inception of the couple's attempts to conceive via natural means. Three main strategies are described and analyzed: (1) baseline strategy of no testing, (2) utilization of a home semen testing kit, (3) universal testing via a clinic visit and gold standard lab semen analysis. The primary outcome was detection of oligospermia (defined as sperm concentration <15 million/mL). Strategies were ranked by months to evaluation by a male infertility specialist saved. Costs were considered from the patient perspective and were incorporated to determine the incremental cost per month saved to evaluation (ICMS) per 100,000 patients. RESULTS: Compared to a baseline strategy of no screening, utilizing a home test would save 89,000 months at the incremental cost of $7,418,000 for an ICMS of $45.51. Shifting to a strategy of universal gold standard clinic and lab testing saves an additional 3000 months but at an ICMS of $17,691 compared to the home testing strategy. CONCLUSION: Widespread adoption and the early usage of home semen analysis may be a cost-effective method of screening for oligospermia and facilitating further evaluation with an andrology specialist.

Self-Reported Race/Ethnicity Is Not Associated with Abnormal Semen Parameters after Accounting for Body Mass Index and Socioeconomic Status.

PURPOSE: We evaluated whether consideration of body mass index (BMI) and socioeconomic status alters the reported association between race/ethnicity and abnormal semen parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all men who underwent semen analysis (SA) for fertility evaluation at an integrated academic health care system from 2002 to 2021. Men were excluded if they had a diagnosis of Klinefelter's syndrome, history of varicocele, prior testicular surgery, prior history of chemotherapy or radiation for cancer, or prior testosterone-modulating medication use. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyze categorical and continuous variables across self-reported racial groups, respectively. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between race and abnormal semen parameters according to WHO 2010 criteria, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: Among 2,750 men meeting inclusion criteria, 2,037 (74.1%) identified as White Non-Hispanic, 207 (7.5%) as Black Non-Hispanic, 245 (8.9%) as Hispanic and 261 (9.5%) as Asian. Median age was 35 years (IQR 32-40). Black men had an older median age (37 years, IQR 33-42, p=0.002) than other groups at the time of index SA. While Black men had higher odds of abnormal sperm concentration (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.02, p=0.02) and abnormal total motile sperm count (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21-2.25, p=0.001) compared to other men after adjusting for age alone, the association of race with abnormal semen parameters was rendered insignificant with the progressive inclusion of BMI, insurance status and neighborhood income as covariates. CONCLUSIONS: In men undergoing SA for fertility evaluation, we did not see evidence of an association between race/ethnicity and abnormal semen parameters after controlling for BMI, insurance status and neighborhood income.

Unmet financial burden of infertility care and the impact of state insurance mandates in the United States: analysis from a popular crowdfunding platform.

OBJECTIVE: To examine infertility-related fund-raising campaigns on a popular crowdfunding website and to compare campaign characteristics across states with and without legislative mandates for insurance coverage for infertility-related care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Online crowdfunding platform (GoFundMe) between 2010 and 2020. PATIENT(S): GoFundMe campaigns in the United States containing the keywords "fertility" and "infertility." INTERVENTION(S): State insurance mandates for infertility treatment coverage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Primary outcomes included fund-raising goals, funds raised, campaign location, and campaigns per capita. RESULT(S): Of the 3,332 infertility-related campaigns analyzed, a total goal of $52.6 million was requested, with $22.5 million (42.8%) successfully raised. The average goal was $18,639 (standard deviation [SD] $32,904), and the average amount raised was $6,759 (SD $14,270). States with insurance mandates for infertility coverage had fewer crowdfunding campaigns per capita (0.75 vs. 1.15 campaigns per 100,000 population than states without insurance mandates. CONCLUSION(S): We found a large number of campaigns requesting financial assistance for costs associated with infertility care, indicating a substantial unmet financial burden. States with insurance mandates had fewer campaigns per capita, suggesting that mandates are effective in mitigating this financial burden. These data can inform future health policy legislation on the state and federal levels to assist with the financial burden of infertility.

Characterizing the Epidemiology and Provider Landscape of Male Infertility Care in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the epidemiology of male factor infertility and identify which types of providers are treating infertile men in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was queried between 2006 and 2016 for all ambulatory care visits. Men with a diagnosis of infertility were identified by international classification of disease coding. Comorbidities, demographic and visit information were abstracted from the patients' medical record by a combination of trained surveyors and physicians. The survey data was weighted to create nationally representative estimates, and a combination of Chi-squared and Student's t-tests were utilized to determine significance. RESULT(S): Among the 8.7 billion patient visits between 2006 and 2016, there were 3,422,000 male encounters with a diagnosis of male factor infertility. The most common provider type for male factor infertility encounters was urology (42.12%) followed by primary care (39.79%), gynecology (7.05%) and all other provider types (11.01%). A significant number of men seen for infertility had comorbidities such as cancer (115,000 men, 3.36%) diabetes (267,000 men, 7.81%), depression (301,000 men, 8.8%), and active tobacco use (857,000 men, 30.3%). CONCLUSION: In a nationally representative sample, more than 50% of ambulatory care visits for male factor infertility were not seen by urologists. These men also had a significant number of comorbidities for a relatively young cohort, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary care for men with a diagnosis of infertility.

Cost-effectiveness of Common Diagnostic Approaches for Evaluation of Asymptomatic Microscopic Hematuria.

Importance: Asymptomatic microscopic hematuria (AMH) is highly prevalent and may signal occult genitourinary (GU) malignant abnormality. Common diagnostic approaches differ in their costs and effectiveness in detecting cancer. Given the low prevalence of GU malignant abnormality among patients with AMH, it is important to quantify the cost implications of detecting cancer for each approach. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness, costs, and incremental cost per cancer detected (ICCD) for 4 common diagnostic approaches evaluating AMH. Design, Setting, and Participants: A decision-analytic model-based cost-effectiveness analysis using inputs from the medical literature. PubMed searches were performed to identify relevant literature for all key model inputs, each of which was derived from the clinical study with the most robust data and greatest applicability. Analysis included adult patients with AMH on routine urinalysis with subgroups of high-risk patients (males, smokers, age ≥50 years) seen in the primary care or urologic referral setting. Interventions: Four diagnostic approaches were evaluated relative to the reference case of no evaluation: (1) computed tomography (CT) alone; (2) cystoscopy alone; (3) CT and cystoscopy combined; and (4) renal ultrasound and cystoscopy combined. Main Outcomes and Measures: At termination of the diagnostic period, cancers detected, costs (payer perspective), and ICCD per 10 000 patients evaluated for AMH. Results: Of the 4 diagnostic approaches analyzed, CT alone was dominated by all other strategies, detecting 221 cancers at a cost of $9 300 000. Ultrasound and cystoscopy detected 245 cancers and was most cost-effective with an ICCD of $53 810. Replacing ultrasound with CT detected just 1 additional cancer at an ICCD of $6 480 484. Ultrasound and cystoscopy remained the most cost-effective approach in subgroup analysis. The model was not sensitive to any inputs within the proposed ranges. Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, ultrasound and cystoscopy was the dominant strategy in 100% of simulations. Conclusions and Relevance: The combination of renal ultrasound and cystoscopy is the most cost-effective among 4 diagnostic approaches for the initial evaluation of AMH. The use of ultrasound in lieu of CT as the first-line diagnostic strategy will optimize cancer detection and reduce costs associated with evaluation of AMH. Given our findings, we need to critically evaluate the appropriateness of our current clinical practices, and potentially alter our guidelines to reflect the most effective screening strategies for patients with AMH.

Perioperative Outcomes, Health Care Costs, and Survival After Robotic-assisted Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: A National Comparative Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy is the gold-standard management for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, and there is debate concerning the comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC). OBJECTIVE: To compare utilization, perioperative, cost, and survival outcomes of RARC versus ORC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We identified bladder urothelial carcinoma treated with RARC (n=439) or ORC (n=7308) during 2002-2012 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare linked data. INTERVENTION: Comparison of RARC versus ORC. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We used propensity score matching to compare perioperative and survival outcomes, including lymph node yield, perioperative complications, and healthcare costs. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Utilization of RARC increased from 0.7% of radical cystectomies in 2002 to 18.5% in 2012 (p<0.001). Women comprised 13.9% versus 18.1% (p=0.007) of RARC versus ORC, respectively. RARC was associated with greater lymph node yield with 41.5% versus 34.9% having ≥10 lymph nodes removed (relative risk 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.22, p=0.03) and shorter mean length of hospitalization at 10.1 (± standard deviation 7.1) d versus 11.2 (± 8.6) d (p=0.004). While inpatient costs were similar, RARC was associated with increased home healthcare utilization (relative risk 1.14, 95% CI 1.04-1.26, p=0.009) and higher 30-d (p<0.01) and 90-d (p<0.01) costs. With a median follow-up of 44 mo (interquartile range 16-78), overall survival (hazard ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.74-1.05) and cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.66-1.26) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: RARC provides equivalent perioperative and intermediate term outcomes to ORC. Additional long-term and randomized studies are needed for continued comparative effectiveness assessment of RARC versus ORC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our population-based US study demonstrates that robotic-assisted radical cystectomy has similar perioperative and survival outcomes albeit at higher costs.

Use, complications, and costs of stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized prostate cancer has potential advantages over traditional radiotherapies. Herein, the authors compared national trends in use, complications, and costs of SBRT with those of traditional radiotherapies. METHODS: The authors identified men who underwent SBRT, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), brachytherapy, and proton beam therapy as primary treatment of prostate cancer between 2004 and 2011 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare linked data. Temporal trend of therapy use was assessed using the Cochran-Armitage test. Two-year outcomes were compared using the chi-square test. Median treatment costs were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: A total of 542 men received SBRT, 9647 received brachytherapy, 23,408 received IMRT, and 800 men were treated with proton beam therapy. There was a significant increase in the use of SBRT and proton beam therapy (P<.001), whereas brachytherapy use decreased (P<.001). A higher percentage of patients treated with SBRT and brachytherapy had low-grade cancer (Gleason score ≤ 6 vs ≥ 7) compared with individuals treated with IMRT and proton beam therapy (54.0% and 64.2% vs 35.2% and 49.6%, respectively; P<.001). SBRT compared with brachytherapy and IMRT was associated with equivalent gastrointestinal toxicity but more erectile dysfunction at 2-year follow-up (P<.001). SBRT was associated with more urinary incontinence compared with IMRT and proton beam therapy but less compared with brachytherapy (P<.001, respectively). The median cost of SBRT was $27,145 compared with $17,183 for brachytherapy, $37,090 for IMRT, and $54,706 for proton beam therapy (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of SBRT and proton beam therapy for localized prostate cancer has increased over time. Despite men of lower disease stage undergoing SBRT, SBRT was found to be associated with greater toxicity but lower health care costs compared with IMRT and proton beam therapy. Cancer 2016;122:2496-504. © 2016 American Cancer Society.