Managing the science in the presence of financial conflict of interest.

We consider the question of why (primarily) and how (secondarily) to perform scientific oversight of research performed by investigators with a financial conflict of interest (COI). One way to frame the trade-off of having investigators with financial COI participate in research is through a decision rule: "Our institution is willing for financially conflicted investigators to participate in research around their intellectual property if (a) the science is likely to be significantly better with their participation (or if other significant benefits accrue); and (b) the COI can be adequately managed". A key component of COI management is the demonstration that the underlying science is sufficiently rigorous and transparent, and in turn, a scientific oversight plan is a key element of that demonstration. Scientific oversight plans should be proactively generated, by individuals (i.e., scientific reviewers) who are independent and expert, and they should assess the rigor and transparency of the research, in a fashion which is fair and efficient. Abbreviations: COI: conflict of interest; SOP: scientific oversight plan.

An educational initiative in response to identified PrEP prescribing needs among PCPs in the Southern U.S.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective HIV prevention method, but many primary care physicians (PCPs) have not incorporated PrEP into practice. While PrEP may be a key strategy to reducing high HIV transmission rates in the southern US, knowledge about PrEP prescribing patterns among PCPs in this region is lacking. An online survey was sent to a large network of PCPs at an academic medical center in North Carolina in October 2015. The survey was repeated in September 2016, after an educational intervention that included on-site trainings at 14 PCP offices. Chi-square tests were used to compare PrEP prescribing patterns among providers. The initial survey was sent to 389 PCPs, with 115 (30%) responding. Of these, 78% reported seeing men who have sex with men (MSM). Only 17% had prescribed PrEP. The most frequently identified barrier was lack of knowledge (60%). When the survey was repeated after the educational initiative, 79 PCPs (20%) responded. Of these, 90% reported seeing MSM, and 35% had prescribed PrEP. PCPs who had attended a training were more likely to have prescribed PrEP (OR 4.84, CI 1.77-13.21). In conclusion, PrEP prescribing among PCPs in the southern US is low. A survey among PCPs identified lack of knowledge as a barrier to prescribing, motivating an institutional-wide educational campaign in response. Further efforts are needed to continue to raise awareness and educate PCPs in the South about PrEP.

Characterizing the Hospice and Palliative Care Workforce in the U.S.: Clinician Demographics and Professional Responsibilities.

CONTEXT: Palliative care services are growing at an unprecedented pace. Yet, the characteristics of the clinician population who deliver these services are not known. Information on the roles, motivations, and future plans of the clinician workforce would allow for planning to sustain and grow the field. OBJECTIVES: To better understand the characteristics of clinicians within the field of hospice and palliative care. METHODS: From June through December 2013, we conducted an electronic survey of American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine members. We queried information on demographics, professional roles and responsibilities, motivations for entering the field, and future plans. We compared palliative care and hospice populations alongside clinician roles using chi-square analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of leaving the field early. RESULTS: A total of 1365 persons, representing a 30% response rate, participated. Our survey findings revealed a current palliative care clinician workforce that is older, predominantly female, and generally with less than 10 years clinical experience in the field. Most clinicians have both clinical hospice and palliative care responsibilities. Many cite personal or professional growth or influential experiences during training or practice as motivations to enter the field. CONCLUSION: Palliative care clinicians are a heterogeneous group. We identified motivations for entering the field that can be leveraged to sustain and grow the workforce.

Identifying cancer patients who alter care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients may experience financial distress as a side effect of their care. Little is known about which patients are at greatest risk for altering their care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study to determine which patients are at greatest risk for altering their care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress. Eligible patients were adults receiving cancer treatment enrolled between June 2010 and May 2011. We grouped coping strategies as lifestyle altering or care altering. We assessed coping strategies and relationships between covariates using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. RESULTS: Among 174 participants, 89% used at least one lifestyle-altering coping strategy, while 39% used a care-altering strategy. Care-altering coping strategies adopted by patients included the following: not filling a prescription (28%) and taking less medication than prescribed (23%). Lifestyle-altering strategies included the following: spending less on leisure activities (77%), spending less on basics like food and clothing (57%), borrowing money (54%), and spending savings (50%). Younger patients were more likely than older patients to use coping strategies (p < 0.001). Lower-income patients adopted care-altering strategies more than higher-income patients (p = 0.03). Participants with more education and shorter duration of chemotherapy used lifestyle-altering strategies more than their counterparts (both p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: As a means of coping with treatment-related financial distress, patients were more likely to use lifestyle-altering approaches, but more than one-third adopted potentially harmful care-altering strategies. Younger age, lower income, higher education, and shorter duration of chemotherapy were characteristics associated with greater use of coping strategies. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The utility of cost discussions between patients with cancer and oncologists.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with cancer can experience substantial financial burden. Little is known about patients' preferences for incorporating cost discussions into treatment decision making or about the ramifications of those discussions. The objective of this study was to determine patient preferences for and benefits of discussing costs with doctors. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, survey study. METHODS: We enrolled insured adults with solid tumors on anticancer therapy who were treated at a referral cancer center or an affiliated rural cancer clinic. Patients were surveyed at enrollment and again 3 months later about cost discussions with doctors, decision making, and financial burden. Medical records were abstracted for disease and treatment data. Logistic regression investigated characteristics associated with greater desire to discuss costs. RESULTS: Of 300 patients (86% response rate), 52% expressed some desire to discuss treatment-related out-of-pocket costs with doctors and 51% wanted their doctor to take costs into account to some degree when making treatment decisions. However, only 19% had talked to their doctor about costs. Of those, 57% reported lower out-of-pocket costs as a result of cost discussions. In multivariable logistic regression, higher subjective financial distress was associated with greater likelihood to desire cost discussions (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.36). Nonwhite race was associated with lower likelihood to desire cost discussions (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer varied in their desire to discuss costs with doctors, but most who discussed costs believed the conversations helped reduce their expenses. Patient-physician cost communication might reduce out-of-pocket costs even in oncology where treatment options are limited.

Practical Dyspnea Assessment: Relationship Between the 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale and the Four-Level Categorical Verbal Descriptor Scale of Dyspnea Intensity.

CONTEXT: Measurement of dyspnea is important for clinical care and research. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the relationship between the 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and four-level categorical Verbal Descriptor Scale (VDS) for dyspnea assessment. METHODS: This was a substudy of a double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing palliative oxygen to room air for relief of refractory breathlessness in patients with life-limiting illness. Dyspnea was assessed with both a 0-10 NRS and a four-level categorical VDS over the one-week trial. NRS and VDS responses were analyzed in cross section and longitudinally. Relationships between NRS and VDS responses were portrayed using descriptive statistics and visual representations. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six participants contributed responses. At baseline, mild and moderate levels of breathlessness were reported by 41.9% and 44.6% of participants, respectively. NRS scores demonstrated increasing mean and median levels for increasing VDS intensity, from a mean (SD) of 0.6 (±1.04) for VDS none category to 8.2 (1.4) for VDS severe category. The Spearman correlation coefficient was strong at 0.78 (P < 0.0001). Based on the distribution of NRS scores within VDS categories, we calculated test characteristics of two different cutpoint models. Both models yielded 75% correct translations from NRS to VDS; however, Model A was more sensitive for moderate or greater dyspnea, with fewer misses downcoded. CONCLUSION: There is strong correlation between VDS and NRS measures for dyspnea. Proposed practical cutpoints for the relationship between the dyspnea VDS and NRS are 0 for none, 1-4 for mild, 5-8 for moderate, and 9-10 for severe.

There is a mismatch between the medicare benefit package and the preferences of patients with cancer and their caregivers.

PURPOSE: To identify insured services that are most important to Medicare beneficiaries with cancer and their family caregivers when coverage is limited. METHODS: A total of 440 participants (patients, n = 246; caregivers, n = 194) were enrolled onto the CHAT (Choosing Health Plans All Together) study from August 2010 to March 2013. The exercise elicited preferences about what benefits Medicare should cover for patients with cancer in their last 6 months of life. Facilitated sessions lasted 2.5 hours, included 8 to 10 participants, and focused on choices about Medicare health benefits within the context of a resource-constrained environment. RESULTS: Six of 15 benefit categories were selected by > 80% of participants: cancer care, prescription drugs, primary care, home care, palliative care, and nursing home coverage. Only 12% of participants chose the maximum level of cancer benefits, a level of care commonly financed in the Medicare program. Between 40% and 50% of participants chose benefits not currently covered by Medicare: unrestricted cash, concurrent palliative care, and home-based long-term care. Nearly one in five participants picked some level of each of these three benefit categories and allocated on average 30% of their resources toward them. CONCLUSION: The mismatch between covered benefits and participant preferences shows that addressing quality of life and the financial burden of care is a priority for a substantial subset of patients with cancer in the Medicare program. Patient and caregiver preferences can be elicited, and the choices they express could suggest potential for Medicare benefit package reform and flexibility.

A decision exercise to engage cancer patients and families in deliberation about Medicare coverage for advanced cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Concerns about unsustainable costs in the US Medicare program loom as the number of retirees increase and experiences serious and costly illnesses like cancer. Engagement of stakeholders, particularly cancer patients and their families, in prioritizing insured services offers a valuable strategy for informing Medicare coverage policy. We designed and evaluated a decision exercise that allowed cancer patients and family members to choose Medicare benefits for advanced cancer patients. METHODS: The decision tool, Choosing Health plans All Together (CHAT) was modified to select services for advanced cancer patients. Patients with a cancer history (N = 246) and their family members (N = 194) from North Carolina participated in 70 CHAT sessions. Variables including participants' socio-demographic characteristics, health status, assessments of the exercise and results of group benefit selections were collected. Routine descriptive statistics summarized participant characteristics and Fisher's exact test compared group differences. Qualitative analysis of group discussions were used to ascertain reasons for or against selecting benefits. RESULTS: Patients and family members (N = 440) participated in 70 CHAT exercises. Many groups opted for such services as palliative care, nursing facilities, and services not currently covered by the Medicare program. In choosing among four levels of cancer treatment coverage, no groups chose basic coverage, 27 groups (39%) selected intermediate coverage, 39 groups (56%) selected high coverage, and 4 groups (6%) chose the most comprehensive cancer coverage. Reasons for or against benefit selection included fairness, necessity, need for prioritizing, personal experience, attention to family needs, holistic health outlook, preference for comfort, freedom of choice, and beliefs about the proper role of government. Participants found the exercise very easy (59%) or fairly easy (39%) to understand and very informative (66%) or fairly informative (31%). The majority agreed that the CHAT exercise led to fair decisions about priorities for coverage by which they could abide. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to involve cancer patients and families in explicit discussions of their priorities for affordable advanced cancer care through the use of decision tools designed for this purpose. A key question is whether such a conversation is possible on a broader, national level.

Patient-oncologist cost communication, financial distress, and medication adherence.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the association between patient-oncologist discussion of cancer treatment out-of-pocket (OOP) cost and medication adherence, a critical component of quality cancer care. METHODS: We surveyed insured adults receiving anticancer therapy. Patients were asked if they had discussed OOP cost with their oncologist. Medication nonadherence was defined as skipping doses or taking less medication than prescribed to make prescriptions last longer, or not filling prescriptions because of cost. Multivariable analysis assessed the association between nonadherence and cost discussions. RESULTS: Among 300 respondents (86% response), 16% (n = 49) reported high or overwhelming financial distress. Nineteen percent (n = 56) reported talking to their oncologist about cost. Twenty-seven percent (n = 77) reported medication nonadherence. To make a prescription last longer, 14% (n = 42) skipped medication doses, and 11% (n = 33) took less medication than prescribed; 22% (n = 66) did not fill a prescription because of cost. Five percent (n = 14) reported chemotherapy nonadherence. To make a prescription last longer, 1% (n = 3) skipped chemotherapy doses, and 2% (n = 5) took less chemotherapy; 3% (n = 10) did not fill a chemotherapy prescription because of cost. In adjusted analyses, cost discussion (odds ratio [OR] = 2.58; 95% CI, 1.14 to 5.85; P = .02), financial distress (OR = 1.64, 95% CI, 1.38 to 1.96; P < .001) and higher financial burden than expected (OR = 2.89; 95% CI, 1.41 to 5.89; P < .01) were associated with increased odds of nonadherence. CONCLUSION: Patient-oncologist cost communication and financial distress were associated with medication nonadherence, suggesting that cost discussions are important for patients forced to make cost-related behavior alterations. Future research should examine the timing, content, and quality of cost-discussions.

Self-reported financial burden and satisfaction with care among patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Health care-related costs and satisfaction are compelling targets for quality improvement in cancer care delivery; however, little is known about how financial burden affects patient satisfaction. METHODS: This was an observational, cross-sectional, survey-based study assessing patient-reported financial burden (FB). Eligible patients were ≥ 21 years with solid tumor malignancy and were receiving chemotherapy or hormonal therapy for ≥ 1 month. The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form assessed patient satisfaction with health care. Subjective FB related to cancer treatment was measured on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Of 174 participants (32% response rate), 47% reported significant/catastrophic FB. Participants reported highest satisfaction with interpersonal manner and lowest satisfaction with financial aspects of care. In adjusted analysis, high FB was negatively associated with general satisfaction (coefficient: -.29), satisfaction with technical quality (coefficient: -.26), and satisfaction with financial aspects of care (coefficient: -.62). Older age was associated with higher scores in all satisfaction subscales except patient-physician communication and financial aspects. Annual household income of <$20,000 was associated with lower satisfaction scores in all subscales except time spent with doctor. High FB was not associated with patient satisfaction scores for accessibility and convenience, communication, interpersonal manner, or time spent with doctor. CONCLUSION: FB is a potentially modifiable correlate of poor satisfaction with cancer care including general satisfaction and satisfaction with the technical quality of care. Addressing cancer-associated FB may lead to improved satisfaction, which in turn can influence adherence, outcomes, and quality of life.

Delivery strategies to optimize resource utilization and performance status for patients with advanced life-limiting illness: results from the "palliative care trial" [ISRCTN 81117481].

CONTEXT: Evidence-based approaches are needed to improve the delivery of specialized palliative care. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this trial was to improve on current models of service provision. METHODS: This 2×2×2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted at an Australian community-based palliative care service, allowing three simultaneous comparative effectiveness studies. Participating patients were newly referred adults, experiencing pain, and who were expected to live >48 hours. Patients enrolled with their general practitioners (GPs) and were randomized three times: 1) individualized interdisciplinary case conference including their GP vs. control, 2) educational outreach visiting for GPs about pain management vs. control, and 3) structured educational visiting for patients/caregivers about pain management vs. control. The control condition was current palliative care. Outcomes included Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) and pain from 60 days after randomization and hospitalizations. RESULTS: There were 461 participants: mean age 71 years, 50% male, 91% with cancer, median survival 179 days, and median baseline AKPS 60. Only 47% of individuals randomized to the case conferencing intervention received it; based on a priori-defined analyses, 32% of participants were included in final analyses. Case conferencing reduced hospitalizations by 26% (least squares means hospitalizations per patient: case conference 1.26 [SE 0.10] vs. control 1.70 [SE 0.13], P=0.0069) and better maintained performance status (AKPS case conferences 57.3 [SE 1.5] vs. control 51.7 [SE 2.3], P=0.0368). Among patients with declining function (AKPS <70), case conferencing and patient/caregiver education better maintained performance status (AKPS case conferences 55.0 [SE 2.1] vs. control 46.5 [SE 2.9], P=0.0143; patient/caregiver education 54.7 [SE 2.8] vs. control 46.8 [SE 2.1], P=0.0206). Pain was unchanged. GP education did not change outcomes. CONCLUSION: A single case conference added to current specialized community-based palliative care reduced hospitalizations and better maintained performance status. Comparatively, patient/caregiver education was less effective; GP education was not effective.

Financial Distress, Use of Cost-Coping Strategies, and Adherence to Prescription Medication Among Patients With Cancer.

The authors found that cost-related medication nonadherence was prevalent among patients with cancer who sought financial assistance.

Enabling health care decisionmaking through clinical decision support and knowledge management.

OBJECTIVES: To catalogue study designs used to assess the clinical effectiveness of CDSSs and KMSs, to identify features that impact the success of CDSSs/KMSs, to document the impact of CDSSs/KMSs on outcomes, and to identify knowledge types that can be integrated into CDSSs/KMSs. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE(®), CINAHL(®), PsycINFO(®), and Web of Science(®). REVIEW METHODS: We included studies published in English from January 1976 through December 2010. After screening titles and abstracts, full-text versions of articles were reviewed by two independent reviewers. Included articles were abstracted to evidence tables by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed for seven domains in which sufficient studies with common outcomes were included. RESULTS: We identified 15,176 articles, from which 323 articles describing 311 unique studies including 160 reports on 148 randomized control trials (RCTs) were selected for inclusion. RCTs comprised 47.5 percent of the comparative studies on CDSSs/KMSs. Both commercially and locally developed CDSSs effectively improved health care process measures related to performing preventive services (n = 25; OR 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27 to 1.58), ordering clinical studies (n = 20; OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.00), and prescribing therapies (n = 46; OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.82). Fourteen CDSS/KMS features were assessed for correlation with success of CDSSs/KMSs across all endpoints. Meta-analyses identified six new success features: Integration with charting or order entry system. Promotion of action rather than inaction. No need for additional clinician data entry. Justification of decision support via research evidence. Local user involvement. Provision of decision support results to patients as well as providers. Three previously identified success features were confirmed: Automatic provision of decision support as part of clinician workflow. Provision of decision support at time and location of decisionmaking. Provision of a recommendation, not just an assessment. Only 29 (19.6%) RCTs assessed the impact of CDSSs on clinical outcomes, 22 (14.9%) assessed costs, and 3 assessed KMSs on any outcomes. The primary source of knowledge used in CDSSs was derived from structured care protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Strong evidence shows that CDSSs/KMSs are effective in improving health care process measures across diverse settings using both commercially and locally developed systems. Evidence for the effectiveness of CDSSs on clinical outcomes and costs and KMSs on any outcomes is minimal. Nine features of CDSSs/KMSs that correlate with a successful impact of clinical decision support have been newly identified or confirmed.

Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing emphasis on the role of clinical decision-support systems (CDSSs) for improving care and reducing costs, evidence to support widespread use is lacking. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of CDSSs on clinical outcomes, health care processes, workload and efficiency, patient satisfaction, cost, and provider use and implementation. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science through January 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Investigators independently screened reports to identify randomized trials published in English of electronic CDSSs that were implemented in clinical settings; used by providers to aid decision making at the point of care; and reported clinical, health care process, workload, relationship-centered, economic, or provider use outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted data about study design, participant characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and quality. DATA SYNTHESIS: 148 randomized, controlled trials were included. A total of 128 (86%) assessed health care process measures, 29 (20%) assessed clinical outcomes, and 22 (15%) measured costs. Both commercially and locally developed CDSSs improved health care process measures related to performing preventive services (n= 25; odds ratio [OR], 1.42 [95% CI, 1.27 to 1.58]), ordering clinical studies (n= 20; OR, 1.72 [CI, 1.47 to 2.00]), and prescribing therapies (n= 46; OR, 1.57 [CI, 1.35 to 1.82]). Few studies measured potential unintended consequences or adverse effects. LIMITATIONS: Studies were heterogeneous in interventions, populations, settings, and outcomes. Publication bias and selective reporting cannot be excluded. CONCLUSION: Both commercially and locally developed CDSSs are effective at improving health care process measures across diverse settings, but evidence for clinical, economic, workload, and efficiency outcomes remains sparse. This review expands knowledge in the field by demonstrating the benefits of CDSSs outside of experienced academic centers. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

In-hospital resource use and medical costs in the last year of life by mode of death (from the HF-ACTION randomized controlled trial).

Patterns of medical resource use near the end of life may differ across modes of death. The aim of this study was to characterize patterns of inpatient resource use and direct costs for patients with heart failure (HF) who died of sudden cardiac death (SCD), HF, other cardiovascular causes, or noncardiovascular causes during the last year of life. Data were from a randomized trial of exercise training in patients with HF. Mode of death was adjudicated by an end point committee. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare hospitalizations, inpatient days, and inpatient costs incurred during the final year of life in patients who died of different causes, adjusting for clinical and treatment characteristics. Of 2,331 patients enrolled in the trial, 231 died after ≥1 year of follow-up with an adjudicated mode of death, including 72 of SCD, 80 of HF, 34 of other cardiovascular causes, and 45 of noncardiovascular causes. Patients who died of SCD were younger, had less severe HF, and incurred fewer hospitalizations, fewer inpatient days, and lower inpatient costs than patients who died of other causes. After adjustment for patient characteristics, inpatient resource use varied by 2 to 4 times across modes of death, suggesting that cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions that reduce mortality from SCD compared to other causes should incorporate mode-specific end-of-life costs. In conclusion, resource use and associated medical costs in the last year of life differed markedly in patients with HF who experienced SCD and patients who died of other causes.

Conflict of interest disclosure in off-label oncology clinical trials.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the prevalence, reliability, and predictors of conflict of interest (COI) and funding disclosure statements for studies of anticancer targeted therapies conducted in the off-label prescribing setting. METHODS: As a part of a federally funded systematic review, manuscripts were included in the analysis if they were used to support one of 19 indications for cancer targeted therapies that were off-label but reimbursable according to compendia published in 2006 or before. Studies were categorized according to trial design, trial results, average impact factor of journals, and presence of COI and funding disclosure statements. RESULTS: Among the 69 included studies, prevalence of COI and funding disclosures was low, at 33% and 58% respectively; time trends showed some improvement between 2002 to 2007, but only 60% of studies had disclosures by 2007. Predictors of COI disclosure were publication in high-impact-factor journals (P < .001), large study sample size (P = .001), enrollment exclusively in the United States (P = .04), and study of the targeted therapy in combination with other agents as opposed to the study drug alone (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Disclosure of potential sources of bias in COI and funding statements in studies of off-label indications for anticancer targeted therapies was low and did not increase substantially over time.

Introduction of the Tools for Economic Analysis of Patient Management Interventions in Heart Failure Costing Tool: a user-friendly spreadsheet program to estimate costs of providing patient-centered interventions.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered health care interventions, such as heart failure disease management programs, are under increasing pressure to demonstrate good value. Variability in costing methods and assumptions in economic evaluations of such interventions limit the comparability of cost estimates across studies. Valid cost estimation is critical to conducting economic evaluations and for program budgeting and reimbursement negotiations. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using sound economic principles, we developed the Tools for Economic Analysis of Patient Management Interventions in Heart Failure (TEAM-HF) Costing Tool, a spreadsheet program that can be used by researchers and health care managers to systematically generate cost estimates for economic evaluations and to inform budgetary decisions. The tool guides users on data collection and cost assignment for associated personnel, facilities, equipment, supplies, patient incentives, miscellaneous items, and start-up activities. The tool generates estimates of total program costs, cost per patient, and cost per week and presents results using both standardized and customized unit costs for side-by-side comparisons. Results from pilot testing indicated that the tool was well-formatted, easy to use, and followed a logical order. Cost estimates of a 12-week exercise training program in patients with heart failure were generated with the costing tool and were found to be consistent with estimates published in a recent study. CONCLUSIONS: The TEAM-HF Costing Tool could prove to be a valuable resource for researchers and health care managers to generate comprehensive cost estimates of patient-centered interventions in heart failure or other conditions for conducting high-quality economic evaluations and making well-informed health care management decisions.

Utility scores and treatment preferences for clinical early-stage cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To determine utility scores for health states relevant to the treatment of early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer. METHODS: Seven descriptive health states incorporating the physical and emotional aspects of medical treatment, recovery, and prognosis were developed. Forty-five female volunteers valuated each health state using the visual analogue score (VAS) and time trade off (TTO) methods. Treatment options were ranked by mean and median TTO scores. The 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine the statistical significance of ranking preferences. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare central tendencies related to age, race, parity, and subject history of abnormal cervical cytology. RESULTS: VAS and TTO scores were highly correlated. Volunteers ranked minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with low-risk features as most preferred (mean TTO = 0.96; median TTO = 1.00) and aborted radical hysterectomy followed by chemoradiation as least preferred (mean TTO = 0.69; median TTO = 0.83). Health states that included radical surgery were ranked higher than those that included chemoradiation, either in the adjuvant or primary setting. When survival was comparable, volunteers rated radical hysterectomy with high-risk pathology followed by adjuvant chemoradiation (mean TTO = 0.78; median TTO = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.69-0.87) similarly to chemoradiation alone (mean TTO = 0.76; median TTO 0.90; 95% CI: 0.66-0.86; p = NS). Utility scores for the majority of health states were not significantly associated with age, race, parity, or subject history of abnormal cervical cytology. CONCLUSION: Subjects consistently preferred surgical excision to treat early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer and chose a minimally invasive approach. Such utility scores can be used to incorporate quality-of-life effects into comparative-effectiveness models for cervical cancer.

Cost efficiency of anticoagulation with warfarin to prevent stroke in medicare beneficiaries with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: in controlled trials, anticoagulation with warfarin reduces stroke risk by nearly two thirds, but the benefit has been less pronounced in clinical practice. This report describes the extent of warfarin use, its effectiveness, and its impact on medical costs among Medicare patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. METHODS: using claims from >2 million beneficiaries in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 5% Sample Standard Analytic Files, we identified patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation from 2004 to 2005. Warfarin use was inferred from 3 or more tests of the international normalized ratio within 1 year. Incidence of ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke and major bleeding was evaluated. Adjusted risk was calculated by Cox proportional-hazards regression. Medical costs (reimbursed amounts in 2006 US dollars) were estimated by multivariate linear regression. RESULTS: of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (N=119 764, mean age=79.3 years), 58.5% were categorized as warfarin users based on the study definition. During an average of 2.1 years' follow-up, the rate of ischemic stroke was 3.9 per 100 patient-years. After multivariate adjustment, ischemic stroke incidence was 27% lower in patients taking warfarin than in patients not taking warfarin (P<0.0001), with no increase in hemorrhagic stroke and a slightly elevated risk of a major bleed. Use of warfarin was independently associated with lower total medical costs, averaging $9836 per patient per year. CONCLUSIONS: these results indicate that 41.5% of Medicare patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation are not anticoagulated with warfarin. The incidence of stroke and overall medical costs were significantly lower in patients treated with warfarin.