Relationship between insurance status and interhospital transfers among cancer patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between insurance status and interhospital transfers has not been adequately researched among cancer patients. Hence this study aimed for understanding this relationship using a nationally representative database. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using National Inpatient Sample (NIS) data collected during 2010-2016 and included all cancer hospitalization between 18 and 64 years of age. Interhospital transfers were compared based on insurance status (Medicare, Medicaid, private, and uninsured). Weighted multivariable logistic regressions were used to calculate the odds of interhospital transfers based on insurance status, after adjusting for many covariates. RESULTS: There were 3,580,908 weighted cancer hospitalizations, of which 72,353 (2.02%) had interhospital transfers. Uninsured patients had significantly higher rates of interhospital transfers, compared to those with Medicare (P = 0.005) and private insurance (P < 0.001). Privately insured patients had significantly lower rates of interhospital transfers, compared to those with Medicare (P < 0.001) and Medicaid (P < 0.001). Logistic regression analyses showed that the odds of having interhospital transfers were significantly higher among uninsured (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.57, 95% CI: 1.45-1.69), Medicare (aOR, 1.38, 95% CI: 1.32-1.45) and Medicaid (aOR, 1.23, 95% CI: 1.16-1.30) patients when compared to those with private insurance coverages. CONCLUSION: Among cancer patients, uninsured and Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to experience interhospital transfers. In addition to medical reasons, factors such as affordability and socioeconomic status are influencing interhospital transfer decisions, indicating existing healthcare disparities. Further studies should focus on identifying the causal associations between factors explored in this study as well as additional unexplored factors.

Factors associated with unplanned readmissions and costs following resection of brain metastases in the United States.

The purpose of this study was to critically analyze the risk of unplanned readmission following resection of brain metastasis and to identify key risk factors to allow for early intervention strategies in high-risk patients. We analyzed data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) from 2010-2014, and included patients who underwent craniotomy for brain metastasis, identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis (198.3) and procedure (01.59) codes. The primary outcome of the study was unplanned 30-day all-cause readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included reasons and costs of readmissions. Hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with 30-day readmission following craniotomy for brain metastasis. During the study period, 44,846 index hospitalizations occurred for patients who underwent resection of brain metastasis. In this cohort, 17.8% (n = 7,965) had unplanned readmissions within the first 30 days after discharge from the index hospitalization. The readmission rate did not change significantly during the five-year study period (p-trend = 0.286). The median per-patient cost for 30-day unplanned readmission was $11,109 and this amounted to a total of $26.4 million per year, which extrapolates to a national expenditure of $269.6 million. Increasing age, male sex, insurance status, Elixhauser comorbidity index, length of stay, teaching status of the hospital, neurological complications and infectious complications were associated with 30-day readmission following discharge after an index admission for craniotomy for brain metastasis. Unplanned readmission rates after resection of brain metastasis remain high and involve substantial healthcare expenditures. Developing tools and interventions to prevent avoidable readmissions could focus on the high-risk patients as a future strategy to decrease substantial healthcare expense.

Hospitalization rates for complications due to systemic therapy in the United States.

The aim of this study was to estimate the trends and burdens associated with systemic therapy-related hospitalizations, using nationally representative data. National Inpatient Sample data from 2005 to 2016 was used to identify systemic therapy-related complications using ICD-9 and ICD-10 external causes-of-injury codes. The primary outcome was hospitalization rates, while secondary outcomes were cost and in-hospital mortality. Overall, there were 443,222,223 hospitalizations during the study period, of which 2,419,722 were due to complications of systemic therapy. The average annual percentage change of these hospitalizations was 8.1%, compared to - 0.5% for general hospitalizations. The three most common causes for hospitalization were anemia (12.8%), neutropenia (10.8%), and sepsis (7.8%). Hospitalization rates had the highest relative increases for sepsis (1.9-fold) and acute kidney injury (1.6-fold), and the highest relative decrease for dehydration (0.21-fold) and fever of unknown origin (0.35-fold). Complications with the highest total charges were anemia ($4.6 billion), neutropenia ($3.0 billion), and sepsis ($2.5 billion). The leading causes of in-hospital mortality associated with systemic therapy were sepsis (15.8%), pneumonia (7.6%), and acute kidney injury (7.0%). Promoting initiatives such as rule OP-35, improving access to and providing coordinated care, developing systems leading to early identification and management of symptoms, and expanding urgent care access, can decrease these hospitalizations and the burden they carry on the healthcare system.

Shadow study: randomized comparison of clinic with video follow-up in glioma undergoing adjuvant temozolomide therapy.

AIM: This study was designed with a primary objective to study the rate of agreement in treatment plan and decisions between video follow-up (VF) and conventional clinic follow-up (CF). PATIENTS & METHODS: Adult patients with intermediate- to high-grade glioma on adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) with facilities for live video call were invited to participate in the study. RESULTS: The concurrence in decision of administering TMZ between VF and CF was 100% (p < 0.00). The median cost incurred in VF was US$58.15 while that incurred in CF was US$131.23 (p < 0.00). CONCLUSION: VF can substitute CF during adjuvant TMZ administration (CTRI/2017/01/007626).