Comparing outcomes of ILD patients managed in specialised versus non-specialised centres.

BACKGROUND: Early appropriate diagnosis and treatment of interstitial lung diseases (ILD) is crucial to slow disease progression and improve survival. Yet it is unknown whether initial management in an expert centre is associated with improved outcomes. Therefore, we assessed mortality, hospitalisations and health care costs of ILD patients initially diagnosed and managed in specialised ILD centres versus non-specialised centres and explored differences in pharmaceutical treatment patterns. METHODS: An epidemiological claims data analysis was performed, including patients with different ILD subtypes in Germany between 2013 and 2018. Classification of specialised centres was based on the number of ILD patients managed and procedures performed, as defined by the European Network on Rare Lung Diseases. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for covariates. Mortality and hospitalisations were examined via weighted Cox models, cost differences by weighted gamma regression models and differences in treatment patterns with weighted logistic regressions. RESULTS: We compared 2022 patients managed in seven specialised ILD centres with 28,771 patients managed in 1156 non-specialised centres. Specialised ILD centre management was associated with lower mortality (HR: 0.87, 95% CI 0.78; 0.96), lower all-cause hospitalisation (HR: 0.93, 95% CI 0.87; 0.98) and higher respiratory-related costs (€669, 95% CI €219; €1156). Although risk of respiratory-related hospitalisations (HR: 1.00, 95% CI 0.92; 1.10) and overall costs (€- 872, 95% CI €- 75; €1817) did not differ significantly, differences in treatment patterns were observed. CONCLUSION: Initial management in specialised ILD centres is associated with improved mortality and lower all-cause hospitalisations, potentially due to more differentiated diagnostic approaches linked with more appropriate ILD subtype-adjusted therapy.

Cost Effects of a Health Coaching in Children and Adolescents With Mental Health and Developmental Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Health coaching (HC) aims to strengthen the role of primary care pediatricians in the treatment of children and adolescents with mental health and developmental disorders by extending consultation time and using disease-specific manuals. We evaluated the effect of HC on costs of specialized, pediatrician, and overall care. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study based on German health insurance claims data, we identified children aged up to 17 years with a newly diagnosed mental health and/or developmental disorder between 2013 and 2015. Patients getting HC were matched to patients receiving usual care. Costs were calculated for 1 year following the start of the treatment and compared by 2-part and gamma models. Absolute costs and cost differences were calculated with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We compared 5597 patients receiving HC with 5597 control patients. The probability of incurring specialized care costs was similar between the groups (0.96, 95% CI: 0.88; 1.05). However, for those who did incur costs, specialized care costs were significantly lower for HC-treated patients (0.77, 95% CI: 0.63; 0.93). Accordingly, specialized care costs were lower by €-94 (95% CI: €-175; €-18), while pediatrician care costs were higher for HC-treated patients by €57 (95% CI: €49; €64). Hence, overall costs did not differ between the groups (€-59, 95% CI: €-191; €71). CONCLUSION: Provision of HC has the potential to lower the costs of specialized care, while increasing the costs of pediatrician care. Overall costs did not differ, suggesting that the additional costs incurred by the HC were offset.

Pirfenidone vs. nintedanib in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Two antifibrotic drugs, pirfenidone and nintedanib, are licensed for the treatment of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). However, there is neither evidence from prospective data nor a guideline recommendation, which drug should be preferred over the other. This study aimed to compare pirfenidone and nintedanib-treated patients regarding all-cause mortality, all-cause and respiratory-related hospitalizations, and overall as well as respiratory-related health care costs borne by the Statutory Health Insurance (SHI). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study with SHI data was performed, including IPF patients treated either with pirfenidone or nintedanib. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity scores was applied to adjust for observed covariates. Weighted Cox models were estimated to analyze mortality and hospitalization. Weighted cost differences with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals (CI) were applied for cost analysis. RESULTS: We compared 840 patients treated with pirfenidone and 713 patients treated with nintedanib. Both groups were similar regarding two-year all-cause mortality (HR: 0.90 95% CI: 0.76; 1.07), one-year all cause (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.95; 1.25) and respiratory-related hospitalization (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.72; 1.08). No significant differences were observed regarding total (€- 807, 95% CI: €- 2977; €1220) and respiratory-related (€- 1282, 95% CI: €- 3423; €534) costs. CONCLUSION: Our analyses suggest that the patient-related outcomes mortality, hospitalization, and costs do not differ between the two currently available antifibrotic drugs pirfenidone and nintedanib. Hence, the decision on treatment with pirfenidone versus treatment with nintedanib ought to be made case-by-case taking clinical characteristics, comorbidities, comedications, individual risk of side effects, and patients' preferences into account.

Cost and survival of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus open lobectomy in lung cancer patients: a propensity score-matched study.

OBJECTIVES: A video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is an accepted alternative to open thoracotomy (OT) in lung cancer patients undergoing lobectomy, but evidence of the benefits of VATS remains inconsistent. The aim of this study was to compare VATS and OT regarding survival, costs and length of hospital stay (LOS). METHODS: We identified lung cancer patients (incident 2013) undergoing VATS or OT from German insurance claims data and performed 1:2 propensity score matching. A 3-year survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier curves and a univariable Cox model. Group differences in the 3-year lung cancer-related costs and costs of hospital stay with lobectomy were compared via univariable generalized linear gamma models. LOS was compared using the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, we compared 294 patients undergoing VATS and 588 receiving OT. We found no differences in the 3-year survival (VATS: 73.8%, OT: 69.2%, P = 0.131) or costs for hospital stay with lobectomy (VATS: €11 921, OT: €12 281, P = 0.573). However, VATS patients had significantly lower lung cancer-related costs (VATS: €20 828, OT: €23 723, P = 0.028) and median postoperative LOS (VATS: 9 days, OT: 11 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From a payer's perspective, extending the use of VATS is beneficial, as it shows economic benefits without affecting survival. However, for a more comprehensive assessment of the benefits of VATS from a society's point of view, further aspects such as patient-reported outcomes and provider-related standby costs need to be investigated further.