Contemporary cost-analysis comparison of direct-to-consumer vs. traditional prescriptions of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors.

After a focused telehealth visit, patients can now access phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5 inhibitor) prescriptions through online direct-to-consumer (DTC) healthcare companies. This study seeks to quantify the cost of DTC PDE5 inhibitor treatment compared to a traditional physician visit and local pharmacy prescription. Two DTC companies, two compounding pharmacies with national reach, three online Canadian pharmacies, and sixteen American pharmacy chains were queried for prices of 90-day regimens of common PDE5 inhibitors. Prices for chains were determined using their publicly available price on GoodRx® with coupon. Cost of physician visit was determined using 2020 Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement for a level 3 new patient visit. For sildenafil 20 mg, a physician visit and local prescription cost a low of $125.45 compared to $144.35 for compounding, $169.34 for Canadian, and $195.00 for DTC. For sildenafil 100 mg, a physician visit and local prescription cost a low of $137.16 compared to $289.35 for compounding, $200.36 for Canadian, and $900.00 for DTC. For tadalafil 5 mg, a physician visit and local prescription cost a low of $125.80 compared to $169.35 for compounding, $195.34 for Canadian, and $720.00 for DTC. For tadalafil 20 mg, a physician visit and local prescription cost a low of $161.00 compared to $289.35 for compounding, $229.00 for Canadian, and $2880.00 for DTC. Thus, local pharmacies, in conjunction with online coupons, consistently provide a markedly less-expensive option for fulfillment of PDE5 inhibitor prescriptions than online DTC services.

Access to Academic Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Providers for New Patient Visits: How Long Are Wait Times?

OBJECTIVES: To determine the wait times to see an academic Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) urologist or gynecologist and to identify factors that may impact these wait times. METHODS: We reviewed all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited urology and gynecology residency programs. Offices of FPMRS providers were called to ascertain the earliest available new patient visit for a fictional female patient with "urine leakage." Programs without FPMRS faculty (18.7%) were excluded. FPMRS providers that did not accept Medicaid (15.6%) were also excluded. Negative binomial regression was performed using SPSS v24. RESULTS: Final analysis included 362 FPMRS providers. Median wait time for a patient with Medicaid was 30 days (interquartile range [IQR] 15-51) and 26 days (IQR 14-42) for Medicare. The median wait time to see an FPMRS-trained gynecologist was 28 days (IQR 15-50) while FPMRS-trained urologists had a median wait time of 25 days (IQR 13.8-43.3). Female providers had longer median wait times when compared to male providers (30 vs 25 days). On regression analysis, only female gender of the provider was significant (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Our study found that nearly 1 in 5 academic departments did not have an FPMRS-trained provider. We found that new patients with urinary incontinence encountered substantial wait times to see FPMRS providers at academic institutions. As we project increased demand for the FPMRS workforce, our findings reflect a challenging landscape where training additional FPMRS providers may be needed to meet demand.

Sex-related disparities in obstructive coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention, and mortality in adults with cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVES: Despite numerous advances in the delivery of resuscitative care, cardiac arrest (CA) continues to be associated with high morbidity and mortality. We sought to examine the association between sex and presence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and mortality in adults with CA. METHODS: The study population included 208 consecutive patients hospitalized with CA who underwent resuscitation and subsequent coronary angiogram at an academic tertiary medical center. The primary outcome of interest was presence of obstructive CAD, defined as >1 coronary artery with >70% stenosis or >1 coronary bypass graft with >70% stenosis. RESULTS: Of the study population, 150 patients (72%) were men and 58 (28%) were women. Women had a trend toward lower rates of obstructive CAD (69% vs 80%, p = 0.09) and lower rates of multivessel CAD compared to their male counterparts, but no significant difference in rates of PCI (62% vs 53%, p = 0.26). While rates of therapeutic hypothermia and vasopressor requirement were similar in men and women, women were less likely to require percutaneous left ventricular support. In-hospital mortality rates were similar in men and women (23% vs 21%, p = 0.68). In multivariate analysis, sex was not independently associated with obstructive CAD or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational contemporary study of adults with CA undergoing coronary angiogram, although women had a trend toward lower rates of obstructive CAD, no significant difference in rates of PCI and in-hospital mortality were noted between men and women.