Cost-effectiveness of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allografts in lower extremity diabetic ulcer treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of using standard care (no advanced treatment, NAT) compared with an advanced treatment (AT), dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (DHACM), when following parameters for use (FPFU) in treating lower extremity diabetic ulcers (LEDUs). METHOD: We analysed a retrospective cohort of Medicare patients (2015-2019) to generate four propensity-matched cohorts of LEDU episodes. Outcomes for DHACM and NAT, such as amputations, and healthcare utilisation were tracked from claims codes, analysed and used to build a hybrid economic model, combining a one-year decision tree and a four-year Markov model. The budget impact was evaluated in the difference in per member per month spending following completion of the decision tree. Likewise, the cost-effectiveness was analysed before and after the Markov model at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY). The analysis was conducted from the healthcare sector perspective. RESULTS: There were 10,900,127 patients with a diagnosis of diabetes, of whom 1,213,614 had an LEDU. Propensity-matched Group 1 was generated from the 19,910 episodes that received AT. Only 9.2% of episodes were FPFU and DHACM was identified as the most widely used AT product among Medicare episodes. Propensity-matched Group 4 was limited by the 590 episodes that used DHACM FPFU. Episodes treated with DHACM FPFU had statistically fewer amputations and healthcare utilisation. In year one, DHACM FPFU provided an additional 0.013 QALYs, while saving $3,670 per patient. At a WTP of $100,000 per QALY, the five-year net monetary benefit was $5003. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that DHACM FPFU reduced costs and improved clinical benefits compared with NAT for LEDU Medicare patients. DHACM FPFU provided better clinical outcomes than NAT by reducing major amputations, ED visits, inpatient admissions and readmissions. These clinical gains were achieved at a lower cost, in years 1-5, and were likely to be cost-effective at any WTP threshold. Adoption of best practices identified in this retrospective analysis is expected to generate clinically significant decreases in amputations and hospital utilisation while saving money.

Patterns of Hospital Performance on the Hospital-Wide 30-Day Readmission Metric: Is the Playing Field Level?

BACKGROUND: Hospital performance on the 30-day hospital-wide readmission (HWR) metric as calculated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is currently reported as a quality measure. Focusing on patient-level factors may provide an incomplete picture of readmission risk at the hospital level to explain variations in hospital readmission rates. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and quantify hospital-level characteristics that track with hospital performance on the current HWR metric. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING/PATIENTS: A total of 4785 US hospitals. METRICS: We linked publically available data on individual hospitals published by CMS on patient-level adjusted 30-day HWR rates from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2014, to the 2014 American Hospital Association annual survey. Primary outcome was performance in the worst CMS-calculated HWR quartile. Primary hospital-level exposure variables were defined as: size (total number of beds), safety net status (top quartile of disproportionate share), academic status [member of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)], National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCI-CCC) status, and hospital services offered (e.g., transplant, hospice, emergency department). Multilevel regression was used to evaluate the association between 30-day HWR and the hospital-level factors. RESULTS: Hospital-level characteristics significantly associated with performing in the worst CMS-calculated HWR quartile included: safety net status [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.61-2.45, p < 0.001], large size (> 400 beds, aOR 1.42, 95% CI 1.07-1.90, p = 0.016), AAMC alone status (aOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.35-2.83, p < 0.001), and AAMC plus NCI-CCC status (aOR 5.16, 95% CI 2.58-10.31, p < 0.001). Hospitals with more critical care beds (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.56, p = 0.033), those with transplant services (aOR 2.80, 95% CI 1.48-5.31,p = 0.001), and those with emergency room services (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 1.12-10.15, p = 0.031) demonstrated significantly worse HWR performance. Hospice service (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.82, p < 0.001) and having a higher proportion of total discharges being surgical cases (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.76, p < 0.001) were associated with better performance. LIMITATION: The study approach was not intended to be an alternate readmission metric to compete with the existing CMS metric, which would require a re-examination of patient-level data combined with hospital-level data. CONCLUSION: A number of hospital-level characteristics (such as academic tertiary care center status) were significantly associated with worse performance on the CMS-calculated HWR metric, which may have important health policy implications. Until the reasons for readmission variability can be addressed, reporting the current HWR metric as an indicator of hospital quality should be reevaluated.

Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of a Novel Antithrombotic Drug Removal System to Reduce Bleeding Risk in Patients on Preoperative Ticagrelor Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic drugs, including the P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor, increase the risk of perioperative bleeding in patients requiring urgent cardiac surgery. Perioperative bleeding can lead to increased mortality and prolong intensive care unit and hospital stays. A novel sorbent-filled hemoperfusion cartridge that intraoperatively removes ticagrelor via hemoadsorption can reduce the risk of perioperative bleeding. We estimated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of using this device versus standard practices to reduce the risk of perioperative bleeding during and after coronary artery bypass grafting from the US healthcare sector perspective. METHODS: We used a Markov model to analyze the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the hemoadsorption device in three cohorts: (1) surgery within 1 day from last ticagrelor dose; (2) surgery between 1 and 2 days from last ticagrelor dose; and (3) a combined cohort. The model analyzed costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Results were interpreted as both incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefits (NMBs) at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000/QALY. We analyzed parameter uncertainty using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The hemoadsorption device was dominant for each cohort. Patients with less than 1 day of washout in the device arm gained 0.017 QALYs at a savings of $1748 (USD), for an NMB of $3434. In patients with 1-2 days of washout, the device arm yielded 0.014 QALYs and a cost savings of $151, for an NMB of $1575. In the combined cohort, device gained 0.016 QALYs and a savings of $950 for an NMB of $2505. Per-member-per-month cost savings associated with device was estimated to be $0.02 for a one-million-member health plan. CONCLUSION: This model found the hemoadsorption device to provide better clinical and economic outcomes compared with the standard of care in patients who required surgery within 2 days of ticagrelor discontinuation. Given the increasing use of ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome, incorporating this novel device may represent an important part of any bundle to save costs and reduce harm.

Economic value of vaccines to address the COVID-19 pandemic: a U.S. cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.

AIMS: The Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) has infected over two hundred million worldwide and caused 4.4 million of deaths as of August 2021. Vaccines were quickly developed to address the pandemic. We sought to analyze the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of a non-specified vaccine for COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a Markov model of COVID-19 infections using a susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered structure over a 1-year time horizon from a U.S. healthcare sector perspective. The model consisted of two arms: do nothing and COVID-19 vaccine. Hospitalization and mortality rates were calibrated to U.S. COVID-19 reports as of November 2020. We performed economic calculations of costs in 2020 U.S. dollars and effectiveness in units of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to measure the budget impact and incremental cost-effectiveness at a $100,000/QALY threshold. RESULTS: Vaccines have a high probability of reducing healthcare costs and increasing QALYs compared to doing nothing. Simulations showed reductions in hospital days and mortality by more than 50%. Even though this represents a major U.S. investment, the budget impacts of these technologies could save program costs by up to 60% or more if uptake is high. LIMITATIONS: The economic evaluation draws on the reported values of the clinical benefits of COVID-19 vaccines, although we do not currently have long-term conclusive data about COVID-19 vaccine efficacies. CONCLUSIONS: Spending on vaccines to mitigate COVID-19 infections offer high-value potential that society should consider. Unusually high uptake in vaccines in a short amount of time could result in unprecedented budget impacts to government and commercial payers. Governments should focus on expanding health system infrastructure and subsidizing payer coverage to deliver these vaccines efficiently.

Squamous cell carcinoma and suspect peripheral nerve sheath tumor in a 10-year-old Paint horse.

A round mass 4 cm in diameter was present on the proximal rostro-lateral border of the right pinna of a 10-year-old, gelded, Paint horse. A preliminary histopathological diagnosis of a potential squamous cell carcinoma and peripheral nerve sheath tumor was made, and the lesion was resected at the base of the lateral edge of the ear.

Do Neighborhoods Matter? A Systematic Review of Modifiable Risk Factors for Obesity among Low Socio-Economic Status Black and Hispanic Children.

BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity increases the risk of obesity and harmful comorbidities later in life. It is influenced by characteristics of a child's neighborhood, particularly among underserved groups. Our objective was to systematically review the evidence relating neighborhood environment and obesity risk among urban, low socioeconomic status (SES) Black and Hispanic children. METHODS: We included studies published from 1993 through early 2017 from PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Sociological Abstracts databases investigating relationships between empirically measured neighborhood characteristics and obesity risk factors in the populations of interest. Databases were last searched on May 8, 2018. Initial analysis took place during 2014 and was completed during 2017. We extracted data on study population, design, and associations between neighborhood characteristics and obesity risk factors. RESULTS: We identified 2011 unique studies; 24 were included. Few studies demonstrated consistent patterns of association. Most neighborhood characteristics were not examined across multiple studies. BMI may be related to living in a lower-income neighborhood or convenience store access. CONCLUSIONS: This review found that the body of evidence relating neighborhood exposures and obesity risk factors among urban, low SES Black (also commonly referred to in the literature as "non-Hispanic Black" or African American) and Hispanic children is limited. Given the high risk of obesity and cardiovascular disease among these populations throughout the life course, research on neighborhood determinants of obesity should specifically include these populations, ensuring adequate power and methodological rigor to detect differences.

Evaluating an insurer-based health coaching program: Impact of program engagement on healthcare utilization and weight loss.

Insurers and employers are increasingly offering lifestyle and weight-loss coaching programs; however, few evaluations have examined their effectiveness. Our objectives were to determine whether level of program engagement was associated with differences in healthcare utilization and weight pre/post coaching. We conducted a retrospective evaluation of enrollees in an insurer-based telephonic health coaching program in Maryland (2013-2014). Our independent variables were program engagement benchmarks (≥3 and ≥6 sessions). Our dependent variables included change in outpatient and emergency department (ED) visits (more visits post program, fewer visits post, or no change pre-post) and associated costs (difference pre-post) using claims data. We calculated mean percent weight change from baseline. We used multivariate-adjusted linear and multinomial logistic regression, as appropriate, to examine the association between outcomes and engagement benchmarks. We included 225 enrollees with mean age 50.7 years, 81.3% women, and mean body mass index of 35.0 kg/m2. Most participants focused on weight management (75.6%) and improving general health (57.8%). Few individuals had outpatient or ED visits, and no significant changes in healthcare utilization were associated with program engagement. Among the weight management subgroup (n = 170), mean weight change was -2.1% (SD 5.1). Participants achieved significantly greater weight loss if they met the 6-session engagement benchmark (ß -3.5%, p < 0.01). Weight management is a popular focus for health coaching participants, and these programs can achieve modest weight loss. Programs should consider designing and testing strategies that promote engagement, given that weight-loss success was improved if participants completed at least 6 coaching sessions.