Healthcare Costs Before and After Diagnosis of Cancer of Unknown Primary Versus Ovarian Cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the healthcare resource usage and costs for patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe and quantify healthcare resource use and costs in Australia, 6 months prior to and after a diagnosis of CUP, and compare to those of women with ovarian cancer. METHODS: Individual-level data combining baseline surveys, clinical records and Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) claim records were analysed for 149 patients with CUP and 480 patients with ovarian cancer from two prospective cohort studies. MBS data were aggregated for the period 6 months prior to diagnosis date and 6 months after diagnosis. Data included doctor consultations, pathology, diagnostics, therapeutic procedures, imaging, allied health and medicines. Generalised linear models were used to evaluate the cost differences between CUP and ovarian cancer using gamma family and log link functions. Models were adjusted for age, employment, marital status, surgery, chemotherapy and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: The mean healthcare costs in the 6 months prior to diagnosis of CUP were Australian (AU) $3903 versus AU$1327 for ovarian cancer (adjusted cost ratio 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-4.15). Mean healthcare costs 6 months post-diagnosis were higher for patients with CUP versus ovarian cancer (AU$20,339 vs AU$13,819, adjusted cost ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.92). Higher costs for patients with CUP were driven by imaging (AU$1937 vs AU$1387), procedures (AU$5403 vs AU$2702) and prescribed medicines for all conditions (AU$10,111 vs AU$6717). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-diagnosis costs for patients with CUP are nearly triple those for ovarian cancer. Six months after diagnosis, healthcare costs for CUP remained higher than for ovarian cancer due to imaging, procedures and medicines.

Utilizing psychological assessment in rehabilitating patients with occupational musculoskeletal injuries.

Patients with occupational musculoskeletal injuries who participate in multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs will likely undergo psychological assessment as a part of the evaluation process. Although the importance of examining non-physical influences on the patient's recovery is widely recognized among clinicians, it is often unclear how findings from psychological assessment are being utilized to facilitate rate of recovery from injury. The purpose of this study was to encourage a re-examination of current psychological assessment practices among multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs and to describe how the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) was utilized with a work-hardening patient sample (n = 86). For the overall patient sample, the MMPI-2 depicted relatively high levels of somatic focus and low levels of psychological distress. To enhance clinical utility, a clustering method identified profile groupings that were distinguishable on the basis of known personality and behavioral correlates. Two profile groupings (Scale 1; Scales 1-3/3-1) were discussed with recommendations for how clinicians may facilitate rate of recovery from injury. The MMPI-2 appears to be particularly useful in identifying treatment conditions that may favorably influence rate of recovery from occupational musculoskeletal injuries.