Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Interventions to Reduce Risk of Aspiration in Elderly Cancer Survivors Residing in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

BACKGROUND: Aspiration can occur in patients of any age group, but it can be prevented. The primary population at risk is made up of survivors of cancer because of their increased risk of mucositis, mucosal atrophy, and dysphagia associated with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and the disease process itself. The rate of incidence of aspiration cannot be quantified, because minor cases of aspiration often go unreported. Sequelae ensuing from aspirations can include pneumonia, end-stage kidney disease, dialysis, and death. METHODS: Analyses of cost, decision-tree modeling, and cost effectiveness were performed to compare a hypothetical, interventional model based on best practices with usual (standard) care. A societal perspective was used as the economic view point. Direct costs, caregiver time, and market values for wages were estimated for the 2 interventions. Effectiveness values for the cost-effectiveness and decision-tree analyses were obtained from the literature. The incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated and used to compare the intervention with usual care. RESULTS: The interventional method was more costly but more effective than usual care. A sensitivity analysis considered the uncertainty of event probability (aspiration vs no aspiration). The interventional protocol for aspiration reduction continued to be more cost effective than usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Aspiration takes a financial toll on all facets of health care, including on nurses, skilled nursing facilities, patients, their families, and insurers, among others. Implementing guidelines that describe best practices for aspiration appears to be a cost-effective strategy for reducing aspirations among cancer survivors - especially elderly patients - who live in skilled nursing facilities.

Patterns in Liver-Related Health Outcomes with Hepatitis C Virus Treatments and Health Equity Implications for Decision Makers: A Cohort Analysis of Medicaid Patients.

Introduction: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a blood-borne communicable disease that, in perhaps 20% of cases, results in a chronic disease. However, traditional peginterferon/ribavirin therapies pose many adverse side effects that are difficult to tolerate, and many patients do not complete the therapy. However, healthcare access to these newer, efficacious treatments are reduced, due to inadequate or lack of coverage of direct acting antiviral (DAA) medication. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of HCV treatment regimens on outcomes of care for HCV-infected Medicaid beneficiaries without cirrhosis/liver disease scarring. Methods: A cohort analysis was performed to evaluate the changes in cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer), and liver transplantation with use of HCV treatments in Medicaid beneficiaries with HCV, and was followed over a period of 10 years. The cohort of Medicaid beneficiaries and relevant variables were generated from published literature. Results: Finally, considering the impact on health expenditures due to improved access to new treatments in Medicaid beneficiaries, DAAs resulted in the lowest decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma-related healthcare cost per person over the 10-year time frame the cohort was followed. Conclusions: The risk of liver-related disease is higher in patients with cirrhosis, as reaching treatment success results in continued disease progression, not normal health status; thus, liver cancer healthcare costs are higher in patients with cirrhosis, compared to those without cirrhosis.