Time-Driven Activity-based Costing and Outcomes of Same-Day Discharge vs Inpatient Robotic Partial and Radical Nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes, total healthcare utilization, and cost savings for same-day discharge (SDD) vs inpatient robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy (RARN). METHODS: We compared 146 RAPNs and 65 RARNs consecutively performed as SDD (RAPN=21, RARN=9) vs inpatient (RAPN=125, RARN=56) from April 2015 to May 2023 at two academic medical centers. We collected baseline demographics, perioperative characteristics, and 30-day complications. We applied the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing analysis to compare total costs of RAPN and PARN throughout the cycle of care, including inpatient vs SDD. RESULTS: Baseline demographics and comorbidities were similar between patients undergoing inpatient vs SDD RAPN and RARN. One Clavien-Dindo grade II complication (3.3%) requiring readmission due to wound infection for antibiotics occurred after SDD RAPN; no complications occurred after SDD RARN. Two unscheduled office or emergency department visits (6.7%) occurred after SDD RAPN for surgical-site infection and urinary retention. SDD vs inpatient RAPN and RARN demonstrated a $3091 (18%) and $4003 (25%) overall cost reduction, respectively. CONCLUSION: SDD RAPN and RARN result in cost savings of 18%-25% without a difference in complications, and thereby improves value-based care for appropriately selected patients.

Same-Day Discharge vs Inpatient Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Complications, Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing, and Patient Satisfaction.

PURPOSE: Historically, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is accompanied by an inpatient hospital admission. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a transition to same-day discharge robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in some centers to free up critically needed inpatient beds. This study aims to compare complications, total health care costs, and patient satisfaction for same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared 392 consecutive robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies performed as same-day discharge (n = 206) vs inpatient (n = 186) from February 2020 to November 2022 at 2 academic medical centers. We utilized propensity score analysis to assess the impact of same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy on 30-day complications (primary outcome). Time-driven activity-based costing analysis was applied to compare total costs of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy care, and we administered a validated Patient Satisfaction Outcome Questionnaire to compare satisfaction scores. RESULTS: Inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy patients were more likely to be older, self-reported Black race or Hispanic ethnicity, and have higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Complication rates were nonsignificantly lower for same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.21; P = .8). Same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy demonstrated a $2106 (19%) overall cost reduction. Median satisfaction survey scores were similar, and a clinically significant difference can be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day discharge robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is cost-effective and should be the preferred approach in appropriately selected patients.

Out-of-pocket costs for commercially insured patients with localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is an underappreciated component of cancer survivorship. Treatment-specific out-of-pocket costs for patients undergoing localized prostate cancer treatment have not, to date, been described and may influence patient's decision making. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study among commercially-insured patients in the United States with incident prostate cancer from 2013 to 2018. We captured out-of-pocket and total costs in the year following diagnosis and compared these between patients receiving radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy, and no local treatment using propensity-score weighting adjusting for patient demographics and pre-diagnosis health utilization costs. RESULTS: Among 30,360 included men [median age 59 years, 83% Charlson score 0], 15,854 underwent surgery, 5,265 radiotherapy, and 9,241 no local therapy in the year following diagnosis. In the 6-months preceding diagnosis, median overall and out-of-pocket health care costs were $2022 (interquartile range $3778) and $466 (interquartile range $781), respectively. Following propensity-score weighting, out-of-pocket costs were significantly lower for patients who received no active treatment (adjusted cost $1746, 95% confidence interval [CI] $1704-1788), followed by those who underwent surgery ($2983, 95% CI $2832-3142, P < 0.001), and those who underwent radiation ($3139, 95% CI $2939-3353, P < 0.001) in the 6-months following diagnosis. Similar patterns were seen with out-of-pocket costs 6 to 12 months following index, with overall costs, and with costs attributable to inpatient, outpatient medical, and outpatient pharmacy services. CONCLUSIONS: Among commercially insured men with incident prostate cancer, active treatment with surgery or radiotherapy was associated with significantly higher out-of-pocket costs versus those who received no treatment, with little difference observed between treatment approaches.

Assessment of gender representation in clinical trials leading to FDA approval for oncology therapeutics between 2014 and 2019: A systematic review-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring representative data accrual in clinical trials is important to safeguard the generalizability of results and to minimize disparities in care. This study's goal was to evaluate differences in gender representation in trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cancer drug approvals. METHODS: An observational study was conducted from January 2014 to April 2019 using PubMed and the National Institutes of Health trials registry for primary trial reports. The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and US Census were consulted for national cancer incidence. The outcome was an enrollment incidence disparity (EID), which was calculated as the difference between male and female trial enrollment and national incidence, with positive values representing male overrepresentation. RESULTS: There were 149 clinical trials with 59,988 participants-60.3% and 39.7% were male and female, respectively-leading to 127 oncology drug approvals. The US incidence rates were 55.4% for men versus 44.6% for women. Gender representation varied by specific tumor type. Most notably, women were underrepresented in thyroid cancer (EID, +27.4%), whereas men were underrepresented in soft tissue cancer (EID, -26.1%). Overall, women were underrepresented when compared with expected incidence (EID, +4.9%; 42% of trials). CONCLUSIONS: For many specific tumor types, women are underrepresented in clinical trials leading to FDA oncology drug approvals. It is critical to better align clinical trial cohort demographics and the populations to which these data will be extrapolated. LAY SUMMARY: This study assesses whether gender disparities exist in clinical trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cancer drug approvals. From January 2014 to April 2019, 149 clinical trials leading to FDA oncology drug approvals showed 60.3% and 39.7% of the enrollees were male and female, respectively. Gender representation varied by specific tumor when compared with the expected incidence rate of cancer in the United States, although women were more often underrepresented. Increased efforts are needed with regard to ensuring equitable representation in oncology clinical trials.

Patient-Reported Financial Toxicity Associated with Contemporary Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Contemporary treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer provide comparable overall and cancer-specific survival. However, the degree of financial burden imposed by treatment, the factors contributing to that burden, and how different treatments compare with regard to financial toxicity remain poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) study enrolled men with localized prostate cancer from 2011 to 2012. Questionnaires were collected at 6, 12, 36, and 60 months after enrollment. Differences in patient-reported financial burden were compared between active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, and external beam radiotherapy using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 2,121 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 15% reported large or very large burden of treatment costs within 6 months, declining to 3% by year 5. When controlling for age, education, income and other covariates, external beam radiotherapy was associated with greater financial burden than active surveillance and radical prostatectomy at 1 year (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.1 and OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0-2.3, respectively) and 3 years (OR 3.1 95% CI 1.1-8.8 and OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.7, respectively). Radical prostatectomy and active surveillance had similar rates of financial burden at all time points. Age, race, education, and D'Amico risk group were associated with financial burden. CONCLUSIONS: External beam radiotherapy was associated with the highest financial burden, even when controlling for age, education and income. Prospective studies that directly measure out-of-pocket and indirect costs and account more thoroughly for baseline socioeconomic differences are warranted in order to identify those most at risk.

Data on the quality and methods of studies reporting healthcare costs of post-prostate biopsy sepsis.

This data article presents the supplementary material for the review paper "Healthcare Costs of Post-Prostate Biopsy Sepsis" (Gross et al., 2019). A general overview is provided of 18 papers, including the details about year and journal of publication, country of dataset, data population characteristics, cost basis, and potential for bias evaluation. Quality assessment and the risk of bias of the 18 papers are detailed and summarized.

Healthcare Costs of Post-Prostate Biopsy Sepsis.

Sepsis following transrectal prostate biopsy occurs in 2%-5% of cases and the risk is increasing. We performed a comprehensive literature search for the cost of post-prostate biopsy sepsis to define the potential cost savings of reducing infectious complications. Reporting of cost is varied and presents a challenge to interpretation. Length of hospitalization ranged from 1.1 to 14 days and the percent admitted to an ICU ranged from 1.1% to 25%. The estimated cost of sepsis post-prostate biopsy, adjusted for inflation, ranged from $8,672 to $19,100. Healthcare costs of treating post-biopsy infection are substantial. Our findings should guide payers and policymakers, especially in value-based care models.

Financial Margins for Prostate Cancer Surgery: Quantifying the Impact of Modifiable Cost Inputs in an Episode Based Reimbursement Model.

PURPOSE: The United States health care system is rapidly moving away from fee for service reimbursement in an effort to improve quality and contain costs. Episode based reimbursement is an increasingly relevant value based payment model of surgical care. We sought to quantify the impact of modifiable cost inputs on institutional financial margins in an episode based payment model for prostate cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 157 consecutive patients underwent robotic radical prostatectomy in 2016 at a tertiary academic medical center. We compiled comprehensive episode costs and reimbursements from the most recent urology consultation for prostate cancer through 90 days postoperatively and benchmarked the episode price as a fixed reimbursement to the median reimbursement of the cohort. We identified 2 sources of modifiable costs with undefined empirical value, including preoperative prostate magnetic resonance imaging and perioperative functional recovery counseling visits, and then calculated the impact on financial margins (reimbursement minus cost) under an episode based payment. RESULTS: Although they comprised a small proportion of the total episode costs, varying the use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (33% vs 100% of cases) and functional recovery counseling visits (1 visit in 66% and 2 in 100%) reduced average expected episode financial margins up to 22.6% relative to the margin maximizing scenario in which no patient received these services. CONCLUSIONS: Modifiable cost inputs have a substantial impact on potential operating margins for prostate cancer surgery under an episode based payment model. High cost health systems must develop the capability to analyze individual cost inputs and quantify the contribution to quality to inform value improvement efforts for multiple service lines.

We do not know what we do not know: innovative approaches to value measurement.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the past several years, there has been an increasing focus on improving the 'value' of healthcare delivered, defined as the ratio of clinical outcomes to the costs incurred to achieve them. The former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Burwell announced in 2015 that the majority of healthcare payments in the Medicare and Medicaid programmes will align with value by 2018. Although this has yet to fully mature, numerous health systems have restructured with a goal of improving the value of care delivered to their populations. Nevertheless, there remain important unanswered questions regarding how we measure value in the current U.S. healthcare system. The purpose of this review is to highlight innovations that are not only making it easier to measure value but also to improve care from the patient, provider and healthcare system perspectives. RECENT FINDINGS: Behavioural start-ups and the introduction of relatively inexpensive health coaches are starting to permeate the healthcare landscape. These coaches are the consumers' advocate, acting as the quarterback of an extended care team in order to optimize health. Furthermore, time-driven activity-based costing has allowed us to understand costs on a more granular level, and novel tracking software may further automate these costing algorithms in order to better facilitate their dissemination. SUMMARY: We must all work to enable new models of care that improve value by incentivizing individuals, payers and providers to improve health, rather than treat the disease after it manifests. We must also continue to improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery largely through improvements in value measurement.

Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair, bicenter analysis with cost comparison using time-driven activity-based costing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To perform a bicenter, retrospective study of perioperative outcomes of retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) and assess costs using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). We identified 355 consecutive patients who underwent RALPN at University of California Los Angeles and the University of Michigan during 2009-2016. We matched according to RENAL nephrometry score, date, and institution for 78 retroperitoneal versus 78 transperitoneal RALPN. Unadjusted analyses were performed using McNemar's Chi-squared or paired t test, and adjusted analyses were performed using multivariable repeated measures regression analysis. From multivariable models, predicted probabilities were derived according to approach. Cost analysis was performed using TDABC. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients treated with retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal RALPN were similar in age (P = 0.490), sex (P = 0.715), BMI (P = 0.273), and comorbidity (P = 0.393). Most tumors were posterior or lateral in both the retroperitoneal (92.3%) and transperitoneal (85.9%) groups. Retroperitoneal RALPN was associated with shorter operative times (167.0 versus 191.1 min, P = 0.001) and length of stay (LOS) (1.8 versus 2.7 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in renal function preservation or cancer control. In adjusted analyses, retroperitoneal RALPN was 17.6-min shorter (P < 0.001) and had a 76% lower probability of LOS at least 2 days (P < 0.001). Utilizing TDABC, transperitoneal RALPN added $2337 in cost when factoring in disposable equipment, operative time, LOS, and personnel. SUMMARY: In two high-volume, tertiary centers, retroperitoneal RALPN is associated with reduced operative times and shortened LOS in posterior and lateral tumors, whereas sharing similar clinicopathologic outcomes, which may translate into lower healthcare costs. Further investigation into anterior tumors is needed.

Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Analysis of Urological Stone Disease.

INTRODUCTION: The documented increasing incidence of nephrolithiasis in the United States will likely be associated with significant economic impact. Time-driven activity-based costing is an analytical method that has been successfully adapted from industrial analysis for use in health care. Using this costing approach we characterized the cost of 4 stone treatment modalities at our academic medical center, including trial of passage, semirigid ureteroscopy, flexible ureteroscopy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. METHODS: We developed process mapping for urological evaluation, treatment and followup of renal or ureteral stones less than 10 mm in size for each treatment method. We calculated cost of resources, equipment, disposables, personnel and space used for each step in the process. Cost was based on the capacity of each resource and the amount of time required for the treatment process. RESULTS: The cost for trial of stone passage, $389, was expectedly lower than for surgical interventions and was mainly driven by clinic visit costs. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid and flexible ureteroscopy costs were $4,367, $4,830 and $5,356, respectively. Intraoperative disposables and personnel were the top contributors to overall treatment costs. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative management is less costly than surgical interventions. Flexible ureteroscopy is the most expensive of surgical interventions. We describe the first time-driven activity-based cost analysis of stone management to our knowledge. Identifying the main drivers of cost can help to improve the value of urological care and improve future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Variations in payment patterns for surgical care in the centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

BACKGROUND: We investigated provider and regional variation in payments made to surgeons by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) by indexing payments to unique beneficiaries treated and examined the proportion of charges that resulted in payments. Understanding variation in care within CMS may prove actionable by identifying modifiable, and potentially unwarranted, variations. METHODS: We analyzed the Medicare Part B Provider Utilization and Payment Data released by CMS for 2012. We included Medicare B participants in the fee-for-service program. We calculated for each provider the ratio of number of services provided to individual beneficiaries, and the ratio of total submitted charges to total Medicare payments. We also categorized each provider into deciles of total Medicare payments, and calculated the means per decile of total Medicare payment for surgeons and urologists. To determine any associations with ratio of services to beneficiaries, we conducted multivariate linear regressions. RESULTS: The 20th, 40th, 60th, and 80th percentiles for the services-per-beneficiary ratios are 1.6, 2.2, 3.1, and 5.0, respectively (n = 83,376). Greater-earning surgeons offered more services per beneficiary, with a precipitous increase from the lowest decile to the highest. Charges were consistently greater than payments by a factor of 3. In our multivariate analysis of services per beneficiary ratio, female providers had lower ratios (P < .01), and we noted significant regional variation in the ratio of services per unique beneficiary (P < .001 for each of the 10 Standard Federal Regions). CONCLUSION: We found significant variation in patterns of payments for surgical care in CMS.

Time-driven activity-based costing of low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate brachytherapy for low-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Cost estimates through traditional hospital accounting systems are often arbitrary and ambiguous. We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to determine the true cost of low-dose-rate (LDR) and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for prostate cancer and demonstrate opportunities for cost containment at an academic referral center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We implemented TDABC for patients treated with I-125, preplanned LDR and computed tomography based HDR brachytherapy with two implants from initial consultation through 12-month followup. We constructed detailed process maps for provision of both HDR and LDR. Personnel, space, equipment, and material costs of each step were identified and used to derive capacity cost rates, defined as price per minute. Each capacity cost rate was then multiplied by the relevant process time and products were summed to determine total cost of care. RESULTS: The calculated cost to deliver HDR was greater than LDR by $2,668.86 ($9,538 vs. $6,869). The first and second HDR treatment day cost $3,999.67 and $3,955.67, whereas LDR was delivered on one treatment day and cost $3,887.55. The greatest overall cost driver for both LDR and HDR was personnel at 65.6% ($4,506.82) and 67.0% ($6,387.27) of the total cost. After personnel costs, disposable materials contributed the second most for LDR ($1,920.66, 28.0%) and for HDR ($2,295.94, 24.0%). CONCLUSIONS: With TDABC, the true costs to deliver LDR and HDR from the health system perspective were derived. Analysis by physicians and hospital administrators regarding the cost of care afforded redesign opportunities including delivering HDR as one implant. Our work underscores the need to assess clinical outcomes to understand the true difference in value between these modalities.

Determinants of radical cystectomy operative time.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with radical cystectomy operative time among Medicare beneficiaries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we identified 4,975 patients who underwent a radical cystectomy during 1991 to 2007. Using a validated method of using anesthesia administrative data to quantify operative time, we used generalized estimating equations to examine the association of patient, provider, and hospital factors on radical cystectomy operative time. RESULTS: We found that mean operative time decreased by 5 minutes per year (Δ = -5.3min/y, P<0.001). Longer operative times were found in academic centers (Δ =+39.0min vs. nonacademic), continent diversion (Δ =+34.9min vs. ileal conduit), surgical excision of≥11 lymph nodes (Δ =+24.9min vs. 1-5), female (Δ =+32.3min vs. male sex), and perioperative anesthesia procedures such as placement of central venous catheters or arterial lines (Δ =+47.2min vs. no procedures), respectively (all P<0.01). In adjusted analysis, higher surgeon volume (Δ =-22.0min vs. lowest volume) was associated with shorter operative times (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Operative times for cystectomy have been steadily decreasing annually. There is notable variation based on academic affiliation, diversion type and extent of lymphadenectomy, surgeon and hospital volumes, as well as use of anesthetic procedures. Efforts to improve operative time by selective referral to high-volume surgeons or hospitals or both, or judicious use of perioperative procedures may have a positive effect on health care costs and overall quality of care for patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.

Utilizing time-driven activity-based costing to understand the short- and long-term costs of treating localized, low-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the costs of delivering care for men with prostate cancer remain poorly described, this article reports the results of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for competing treatments of low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Process maps were developed for each phase of care from the initial urologic visit through 12 years of follow-up for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), cryotherapy, high-dose rate (HDR) and low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and active surveillance (AS). The last modality incorporated both traditional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and multiparametric-MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. The costs of materials, equipment, personnel, and space were calculated per unit of time and based on the relative proportion of capacity used. TDABC for each treatment was defined as the sum of its resources. RESULTS: Substantial cost variation was observed at 5 years, with costs ranging from $7,298 for AS to $23,565 for IMRT, and they remained consistent through 12 years of follow-up. LDR brachytherapy ($8,978) was notably cheaper than HDR brachytherapy ($11,448), and SBRT ($11,665) was notably cheaper than IMRT, with the cost savings attributable to shorter procedure times and fewer visits required for treatment. Both equipment costs and an inpatient stay ($2,306) contributed to the high cost of RALP ($16,946). Cryotherapy ($11,215) was more costly than LDR brachytherapy, largely because of increased single-use equipment costs ($6,292 vs $1,921). AS reached cost equivalence with LDR brachytherapy after 7 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TDABC is feasible for analyzing cancer services and provides insights into cost-reduction tactics in an era focused on emphasizing value. By detailing all steps from diagnosis and treatment through 12 years of follow-up for low-risk prostate cancer, this study has demonstrated significant cost variation between competing treatments.

Determining the True Costs of Treating Small Renal Masses Using Time Driven, Activity Based Costing.

INTRODUCTION: We report the implementation of time driven, activity based costing for competing treatments of small renal masses at an academic referral center. METHODS: To use time driven, activity based costing we developed a process map outlining the steps to treat small renal masses. We then derived the costs of supplying every resource per unit time. Known as the capacity cost rate, this included equipment and its depreciation (eg price per minute of the operating room table), personnel and space (eg cost per minute to rent clinic space). We multiplied each capacity cost rate by the time for each step. Time driven, activity based costing was defined as the sum of the products for each intervention. RESULTS: Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was the most expensive treatment for small renal masses. It was 69.7% more costly than the most inexpensive inpatient modality, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy ($17,841.79 vs $10,514.05). Equipment costs were greater for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy than for open partial nephrectomy. However for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy vs open partial nephrectomy the lower personnel capacity cost rate due to faster operating room time (195.2 vs 217.3 minutes, p = 0.001) and shorter length of stay (2.4 vs 3.7 days, p = 0.13) were the primary drivers in lowering costs. Radiofrequency ablation was 48.4% less expensive than laparoscopic radical nephrectomy ($5,093.83 vs $10,514.05) largely by avoiding inpatient costs. Renal biopsy contributed 3.5% vs 12.2% to the overall cost of robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy vs radiofrequency ablation but it may allow for increased active surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Using time driven, activity based costing we determined the relative resource utilization of competing small renal mass treatments, finding significant cost differences among various treatments. This informs value considerations, which are particularly relevant in the current health care milieu.