Cost variation and revisit rate for adult patients with asthma presenting to the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is common, resulting in 53 million emergency department (ED) visits annually. Little is known about variation in cost and quality of ED asthma care. STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe variation in costs and 7-day ED revisit rates for asthma care across EDs. Our primary objective was to test for an association between ED costs and the likelihood of a 7-day revisit for another asthma exacerbation. METHODS: We used the 2014 Florida State Emergency Department Database to perform an observational study of ED visits by patients ≥18 years old with a primary diagnosis of asthma that were discharged home. We compared patient and hospital characteristics of index ED discharges with and without 7-day revisits, then tested the association between ED revisits and index ED costs. Multilevel regression was performed to account for hospital-level clustering. RESULTS: In 2014, there were 54,060 adult ED visits for asthma resulting in discharge, and 1667 (3%) were associated with an asthma-related ED revisit within 7 days. Median cost for an episode of ED asthma care was $597 with an interquartile range of $371-980. After adjusting for both patient and hospital characteristics, lack of insurance was associated with higher odds of revisit (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.18-1.71), while private insurance, female gender, and older age were associated with lower odds of revisit. Hospital costs were not associated with ED revisits (OR = 1.00; 95% CI 1.00-1.00). CONCLUSION: Hospital costs associated with ED asthma visits vary but are not associated with odds of ED revisit.

Wide Provider Variation in Cost for Thyroidectomy: Potential Benefits of Standardizing Practice?

OBJECTIVE(S): Identifying provider variation in surgical costs could control rising healthcare expenditure and deliver cost-effective care. While these efforts have mostly focused on complex and expensive operations, provider-level variation in costs of thyroidectomy has not been well examined. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 921 consecutive total thyroidectomies performed by 14 surgeons at our institution between September 2011 and July 2016. Data were extracted from the Change Healthcare Performance Analytics Program. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 47.4 ± 0.5 y, 81% were females, 64.7% were Caucasians, and 18.8% were outpatients. The number of thyroidectomies performed by the 14 surgeons ranged from 4 to 597 (mean = 66). The mean costs per provider varied widely from $4,293 to $15,529 (P < 0.001). The mean length of stay was 1d ± .03 with wide variation among providers (0-6 d). Providers whose hospital cost exceeded the institutional mean demonstrated significantly higher anesthesia fees and lab costs (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial variation in hospital cost among providers for thyroidectomy despite practicing in the same academic institution, with some surgeons spending 3x more for the same operation. Implementing institutional standards of practice could reduce variation and the costs of surgical care.

Meta-analysis of average costs of HIV testing and counselling and voluntary medical male circumcision across thirteen countries.

Objective: Explore facility-level average costs per client of HIV testing and counselling (HTC) and voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) services in 13 countries.Methods: Through a literature search we identified studies that reported facility-level costs of HTC or VMMC programmes. We requested the primary data from authors and standardised the disparate data sources to make them comparable. We then conducted descriptive statistics and a meta-analysis to assess the cost variation among facilities. All costs were converted to 2017 US dollars ($).Results: We gathered data from 14 studies across 13 countries and 772 facilities (552 HTC, 220 VMMC). The weighted average unit cost per client served was $15 (95% CI 12, 18) for HTC and $59 (95% CI 45, 74) for VMMC. On average, 38% of the mean unit cost for HTC corresponded to recurrent costs, 56% to personnel costs, and 6% to capital costs. For VMMC, 41% of the average unit cost corresponded to recurrent costs, 55% to personnel costs, and 4% to capital costs. We observed unit cost variation within and between countries, and lower costs in higher scale categories in all interventions.

Patient and facility variation in costs of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness or value of cardiovascular therapies may be undermined by unwarranted cost variation, particularly for heterogeneous procedures such as catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to characterize cost variation of AF ablation in the US healthcare system and the relationship between cost and outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the MarketScan® commercial claims and Medicare supplemental databases including patients who received an AF ablation from 2007 to 2011. We aggregated encounter cost, reflecting total payments received for the encounter, to the facility level to calculate median facility cost. We classified procedures as outpatient or inpatient and assessed for association between cost and 30-day and 1-year outcomes. The analysis cohort included 9,415 AF ablations (59±11 years; 28% female; 52% outpatient) occurring at 327 facilities, with large cost variation across facilities (median: $25,100; 25th percentile: $18,900, 75th percentile: $35,600, 95th percentile: $57,800). Among outpatient procedures, there was reduced healthcare utilization in higher cost quintiles with reductions in rehospitalization at 30-days (Quintile 1: 16.1%, Quintile 5: 8.8%, P < 0.001) and 1-year (Quintile 1: 34.8%, Quintile 5: 25.6%, P < 0.001), which remained significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although median costs of AF ablation are below amounts used in prior cost-effectiveness studies that demonstrated good value, large facility variation in cost suggests opportunities for cost reduction. However, for outpatient encounters, association of cost to modestly improved outcomes suggests cost containment strategies could have variable effects.

Assessment of cost drivers and cost variation for lumbar interbody fusion procedures using the Value Driven Outcomes database.

OBJECTIVE Efforts to examine the value of care-combining both costs and quality-are gaining importance in the current health care climate. This thrust is particularly evident in treating common spinal disease where both incidences and costs are generally high and practice patterns are variable. It is often challenging to obtain direct surgical costs for these analyses, which hinders the understanding of cost drivers and cost variation. Using a novel tool, the authors sought to understand the costs of posterior lumbar arthrodesis with interbody devices. METHODS The Value Driven Outcomes (VDO) database at the University of Utah was used to evaluate the care of patients who underwent open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS), 1- and 2-level lumbar spine fusion (Current Procedural Terminology code 22263). Patients treated from January 2012 through June 2017 were included. RESULTS A total of 276 patients (mean age 58.9 ± 12.4 years) were identified; 46.7% of patients were men. Most patients (82.2%) underwent 1-level fusion. Thirteen patients (4.7%) had major complications and 11 (4.1%) had minor complications. MIS (ß = 0.16, p = 0.002), length of stay (ß = 0.47, p = 0.0001), and number of operated levels (ß = 0.37, p = 0.0001) predicted costs in a multivariable analysis. Supplies and implants (55%) and facility cost (36%) accounted for most of the expenditure. Other costs included pharmacy (7%), laboratory (1%), and imaging (1%). CONCLUSIONS These results provide direct cost accounting for lumbar fusion procedures using the VDO database. Efforts to improve the value of lumbar surgery should focus on high cost areas, i.e., facility and supplies/implant.

Cost analysis study of neuropsychiatric drugs: Role of National List of Essential Medicines, India.

CONTEXT: This study investigated the cost variation among neuropsychiatric drugs prevalent in the Indian market with reference to the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM, 2015). AIMS: To promote the rational use of medicines through cost variation analysis among drugs for neuropsychiatric disorders enlisted in NLEM and those not included in NLEM (NNLEM). STUDY DESIGN: This study included drugs used for epilepsy, migraine, psychosis, depression, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), bipolar disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The unit drug cost for the selected strengths of different manufacturers mentioned in the Current Index of Medical Specialities 2016 was used for calculating cost/defined daily dose (DDD). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Comparison was done among individual drugs and groups (NLEM and NNLEM) by cost/DDD in terms of interquartile range, percentage cost variation, and cost ratio. RESULTS: The cost variation is wide for neuropsychiatric drugs (maximum, 1724.3% for risperidone in NLEM, and 1780% for olanzapine in NNLEM). The drug-to-cost ratio is the highest (168.8 times) for bipolar disorder and the lowest (9.7 times) for GAD. The NLEM drugs were found to be more economical than the NNLEM drugs among antiepileptic drugs, antidepressants, and drugs for bipolar disorder; however, the reverse was noted for antimigraine drugs and drugs for GAD. Antipsychotic medications and drugs for OCD in the NLEM group have a wider range than in the NNLEM group. CONCLUSIONS: The NLEM group has economical drugs in some disease categories; there is a need to consider the cost effectiveness of all drug categories while revising the NLEM next time and attention should focus on drug price regulation policies to accomplish the goal of rational use of medicines.

Drivers of the Variation in Prosthetic Implant Purchase Prices for Total Knee and Total Hip Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have documented wide variation in health care spending and prices; however, the causes for the variation in supply purchase prices across providers are not well understood. The purpose of this study was to determine the drivers of variation in prosthetic implant purchase prices for primary total knee and hip arthroplasties (TKA and THA, respectively) across providers. METHODS: We obtained retrospective data from 27 hospitals on the average prosthetic implant purchase prices for primary TKAs and THAs over the 12 months ending September 30, 2013, as well as data on a range of independent potential explanatory variables. Each hospital performed at least 200 primary total joint arthroplasties per year. The multivariate seemingly unrelated regression approach was used to evaluate the impact of the variables on purchase price for each type of implant. RESULTS: The average purchase price at the hospital at the 90th percentile was 2.1 times higher for TKAs and 1.7 times higher for THAs than that at the hospital at the 10th percentile. The use of a hospital-physician committee for implant vendor selection and negotiation was associated with 17% and 23% lower implant purchase prices (P < .05) for TKAs and THAs, respectively, relative to hospitals that did not have this collaborative approach. CONCLUSION: The use of a joint hospital-physician committee is a potential strategy for achieving lower average purchase prices for prosthetic implants. Policies to increase hospital-physician collaboration may lead to lower average purchase prices in this market.

Decreasing total joint implant costs and physician specific cost variation through negotiation.

Reducing the cost of total joint implants can significantly reduce the cost of an episode of care without affecting the quality. In 2011 we began a program to decrease and standardize the pricing of total joint implants. In the first year of the intervention we preformed 1,090 and 1,022 unilateral total knee and total hip arthroplasties respectively. Based on our volume and pricing data, our institution saved over $2 million during the first year of this intervention. It is clear that our initiative to negotiate lower implant cost with our vendors has lead to a significant reduction in the cost of joint arthroplasties and a reduction in the variability in costs between physicians.

Cost variation of nonelective surgery for ulcerative colitis across the United States.

BACKGROUND: Although clinical outcomes of surgery for ulcerative colitis (UC) have improved in the modern biologic era, expenditures continue to increase. A contemporary cost analysis of UC operative care is lacking. The present study aimed to characterize risk factors and center-level variation in hospitalization costs after nonelective resection for UC. METHODS: All adults with UC in the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database undergoing nonelective colectomy or rectal resection were identified. Mixed-effects models were developed to evaluate patient and hospital factors associated with costs. Random effects were estimated and used to rank hospitals by increasing risk-adjusted center-level costs. High-cost hospitals (HCHs) in the top decile of expenditure were identified, and their association with select outcomes was subsequently assessed. RESULTS: An estimated 10,280 patients met study criteria with median index hospitalization costs of $40,300 (IQR, $26,400-$65,000). Increased time to surgery was significantly associated with a +$2500 increment in costs per day. Compared with low-volume hospitals, medium- and high-volume centers demonstrated a -$5900 and -$8200 reduction in costs, respectively. Approximately 19.2% of variability in costs was attributable to interhospital differences rather than patient factors. Although mortality and readmission rates were similar, HCH status was significantly associated with increased complications (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.39), length of stay (+10.1 days), and nonhome discharge (AOR, 1.78). CONCLUSION: The present work identified significant hospital-level variation in the costs of nonelective operations for UC. Further efforts to optimize time to surgery and regionalize care to higher-volume centers may improve the value of UC surgical care in the United States.

An Analysis of the Cost Variation Among Different Antimicrobial Agents: The Indian Scenario.

Background and objective Infectious diseases pose a substantial global health challenge, especially in developing countries where healthcare accessibility is limited. Pharmaceutical expenses constitute a significant share of out-of-pocket expenditure (60-90%). Hence, the affordability of medications becomes a critical determinant for patient compliance. This study focuses on the economic dynamics of antimicrobial agents. Methodology After collecting data from the Current Index of Medical Specialties (CIMS), different antimicrobial agents (AMAs) were assessed based on their cost per 10 tablets/10 capsules/one vial of injection. A comprehensive analysis was performed to assess the minimum and maximum costs for each medication across diverse pharmaceutical companies. Cost variation was assessed through both the cost ratio and percentage cost variation. The data were analyzed and represented using descriptive statistics Results Our findings indicate significant cost variations, with nitrofurantoin 100 mg tablet showcasing a staggering 1498.5% variation, followed by meropenem 500 mg vial at 473.91%. Conversely, the cotrimoxazole (sulfamethoxazole 800 mg + trimethoprim 160 mg) tablet exhibits a minimal 6.05% variation, underscoring the diversity in pricing strategies. The number of brands ranged from two to 62. Conclusions This study underscores the importance of considering cost variations in antimicrobial agents while prescribing the same. Doing so will not only address the economic challenges faced by patients but also help in improving compliance and reducing the risk of antimicrobial drug resistance. This approach advocates for a more economically sustainable and patient-centric healthcare ecosystem in India.

Lack of Association of Pediatric Surgical Patient Outcomes With Increased Disposable Operating Room Supply Costs.

INTRODUCTION: There is wide variation in the cost of disposable operating room supplies between surgeons performing the same operation at the same institution. The general relationship between variation in disposable supply cost and patient outcomes is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between disposable supply cost and patient outcomes for sixteen common operations. METHODS: Cost data were reviewed for the most common procedures performed by five surgical divisions at a single children's hospital over a six-month period in 2021. For procedure, the median disposable OR costs were calculated. Each operation performed was categorized as low cost (below the group median) or high cost (above the group median. We compared the rates of adverse events (clinic visit within 5 days, 30-day emergency department visit, unplanned reoperation, unplanned readmission, anesthesia complications, prolonged hospital length of stay, need for blood product transfusion, or death) between procedures with low and high disposable supply costs. RESULTS: 1139 operations performed by 48 unique surgeons from five specialties were included; 596 (52%) were low-cost and 543 (48%) high-cost. The low and high-cost groups did not differ regarding most demographic characteristics. Overall, 21.9% of children suffered any adverse outcome; this rate did not differ between the low and high-cost groups when evaluated individually or in aggregate (20.5% vs 23.6%, p = 0.23). CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that across a wide range of pediatric surgical procedures, the cost of disposable operating room supplies was not associated with the risk of adverse outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Variation in cost of disposable operating room supplies at a children's hospital.

BACKGROUND: Operating room (OR) costs account for 40% of hospital costs. Disposable supplies make up a portion of OR costs and are the only cost that is under control of the surgeon. There are little data to explain how surgeons select surgical supplies and what factors predict supply selection. Our goal with the current work was to assess variation in cost of disposable OR supplies at the surgeon level, hypothesizing high variability would be observed. STUDY DESIGN: Cost data were reviewed for the most common procedures performed by five surgical divisions at a single children's hospital over a six-month period in 2021. For each procedure, the average disposable OR costs for each surgeon were tabulated and compared to the median supply cost for a given procedure at the group level. RESULTS: For each procedure, the variation ranged from 149% (gastrostomy tube placement) to 758% (tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy). The median supply cost for an individual surgeon was not always above or below the median supply cost for that procedure for the group. No relationship was observed between whether the supply cost was above or below the median for a given case and a surgeon's case volume, years in practice, or operative length. There was also no relationship between surgeon volume and median cost, surgery length, and years of experience. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate variation in the cost of disposable OR supplies at the individual surgeon level at a single institution. This variation is not explained by case volume, years in practice, or operative length.

Variability drivers of treatment costs in hospitals: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Studies on variability drivers of treatment costs in hospitals can provide the necessary information for policymakers and healthcare providers seeking to redesign reimbursement schemes and improve the outcomes-over-cost ratio, respectively. This systematic literature review, focusing on the hospital perspective, provides an overview of studies focusing on variability in treatment cost, an outline of their study characteristics and cost drivers, and suggestions on future research methodology. METHODS: We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We searched PubMED/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Science direct, OvidSP and Cochrane library. Two investigators extracted and appraised data for citation until October 2020. RESULTS: 90 eligible articles were included. Patient, treatment and disease characteristics and, to a lesser extent, outcome and institutional characteristics were identified as significant variables explaining cost variability. In one-third of the studies, the costing method was classified as unclear due to the limited explanation provided by the authors. CONCLUSION: Various patient, treatment and disease characteristics were identified to explain hospital cost variability. The limited transparency on how hospital costs are defined is a remarkable observation for studies wherein cost variability is the main focus. Recommendations relating to variables, costs, and statistical methods to consider when designing and conducting cost variability studies were provided.

Defining value in cardiac surgery: A contemporary analysis of cost variation across the United States.

Objective: Isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement are common cardiac operations performed in the United States and serve as platforms for benchmarking. The present national study characterized hospital-level variation in costs and value for coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement. Methods: Adults undergoing elective, isolated coronary artery bypass grafting or aortic valve replacement were identified in the 2016-2018 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Center quality was defined by the proportion of patients without an adverse outcome (death, stroke, respiratory failure, pneumonia, sepsis, acute kidney injury, and reoperation). High-value hospitals were defined as those with observed-to-expected ratios less than 1 for costs and greater than 1 for quality, whereas the converse defined low-value centers. Results: Of 318,194 patients meeting study criteria, 71.9% underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and 28.1% underwent aortic valve replacement. Variation in hospital-level costs was evident, with median center-level cost of $36,400 (interquartile range, 29,500-46,700) for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and $38,400 (interquartile range, 32,300-47,700) for aortic valve replacement. Observed-to-expected ratios for quality ranged from 0.2 to 10.9 for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and 0.1 to 11.7 for isolated aortic valve replacement. Hospital factors, including volume and quality, contributed to approximately 9.9% and 11.2% of initial cost variation for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement. High-value centers had greater cardiac surgery operative volume and were more commonly teaching hospitals compared to low-value centers, but had similar patient risk profiles. Conclusions: Significant variation in hospital costs, quality, and value exists for 2 common cardiac operations. Center volume was associated with value and partly accounts for variation in costs. Our findings suggest the need for value-based care paradigms to reduce expenditures and optimize outcomes.

Cost Analysis of Different Antibiotic Brands Available in Indian Market with Reference to National List of Essential Medicines.

BACKGROUND: About 60%-90% of healthcare spending in India is on medicine which is mainly out of pocket. Almost all the drugs including antibiotics are available as brands with variable cost. Indian government formulated National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM) to ensure availability of affordable medicines to the population. Prescribing drugs from NLEM and considering the cost of drug, especially antibiotics in practice, can reduce cost of treatment and patient's out-of-pocket expenditure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to analyze cost variation of different antibiotic brands available in Indian market with reference to NLEM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: List of antibiotics listed in the NLEM 2015, India, was prepared. Percentage cost variation and cost ratio of different brands of these antibiotics were calculated and compared. RESULTS: We found 17 antibiotics listed in NLEM 2015. The number of brands varied from 2 to 102. We found wide cost variations among different brands of same antibiotics. Minimum cost variation was 7.34% (for ciprofloxacin 200 mg/100 ml vial) while maximum 1049.82% (for azithromycin 500 mg tablet). CONCLUSION: There is wide cost variation in different brands of same antibiotics listed in the NLEM. Prescribers should prescribe cheaper brands of antibiotics to ensure that patients complete the course of treatment and thus reduce development of resistance to antibiotics.

Health economics and effectiveness analysis of generic anti-diabetic medication from jan aushadhi: An ambispective study in community pharmacy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The pharmacotherapy of diabetes mellitus has a colossal economic burden, which demands cost-effective therapy, as the patients have to be on treatment lifelong. Thus, our study aimed to study cost variation and effectiveness analysis among type 2 diabetic patients. METHODOLOGY: We conducted ambi-spective research for the adult type 2 diabetes patients who underwent substitution of branded anti-diabetic therapy with the generic alternative from "Jan Aushadhi" for more than one month and were not using any other anti-diabetic medicines. RESULTS: Among the monotherapy, glimepiride (2500%) and vildagliptin (20%) were found to have wide and narrow percentage cost variation respectively whereas, metformin Hcl 500 mg plus voglibose 0.2 mg was estimated to have the highest (891.7%), and teneligliptin 20 mg plus metformin 500 mg with the lowest (137.29%) cost variation in case of combined therapy. Similarly, generic substitutions were cost-effective in most patients, whereas the increased cost of brand drugs didn't justify its effectiveness. There was no significant difference between glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of brand and generic anti-diabetic drugs (t = 0.774, p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: The adaptation of generic drugs can significantly reduce the economic burden of treatment. Thus, healthcare professionals should promote generic medicines by prescribing & dispensing generic drugs and erasing misconceptions prevailing among patients.

Impact of pharmaceutical price controls on the cost of cardiovascular drugs: does essentiality matter?

BACKGROUND: With the goal of improving the affordability of medicines, governments across the globe have instituted various forms of price controls. Since 2013, India has been regulating the prices of drugs included in its national list of essential medicines (NLEM). Here we evaluate the cost variations among available cardiovascular drugs and perform cost-analysis comparing essential and non-essential drugs. METHODS: Data on listed prices of selected cardiovascular drugs - essential (NLEM) and non-essential (NNLEM) - were sourced from multiple drug information compendia. Price of medications was calculated in cost-per-defined-daily-dose (DDD)-units and NLEM vs. NNLEM drugs were compared. Regression analysis was used to explore the determinants of percentage cost variation (PCV) of drugs. RESULTS: The median-cost/DDD of essential medicines was lower as compared to non-essential ones for all therapeutic drug classes, with greatest difference observed for antianginals and least for heart failure medicines. There were substantial cost variations with values in excess of 1000% for six medicines, all being essential. The regression analysis failed to demonstrate a significant effect of essentiality on PCV (ß = 0.19, P = 0.314). CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate considerable cost variations for some essential cardiovascular medicines. Given the need for prolonged and often, lifelong-treatment, there is significant potential for cost savings based on chosen brand, highlighting the need for patient as well as prescriber education.

A Cost Variation Analysis of Drugs Available in the Indian Market for the Management of Thromboembolic Disorders.

Introduction Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have become one of the major causes of mortality among the Indian population. The costs of anticoagulant, antiplatelet, and fibrinolytic drugs that are used to treat various thromboembolic disorders and used as prophylactics for individuals at high risk of CVDs vary widely in the Indian pharmaceutical market. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost variation of different brands of drug formulations and to compare the branded prices of the formulations with their corresponding generic and ceiling prices. Materials and methods This study followed an analytical method. Costs of various drugs were obtained from the October - December 2019 edition of the Current Index of Medical Specialities (CIMS) and December 2019 edition of the Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) India. Cost ratio and percentage variation in cost per tablet/capsule/injection of different drugs available in the Indian market and manufactured by different pharmaceutical companies were calculated. Comparison of the branded prices with generic and ceiling prices was also performed for different drugs by using information available from official websites. Results Percentage variation in cost among the commonly prescribed drugs for the management of thromboembolic disorders was found to be highest for prasugrel 10 mg tablet (1,408.44%) while it was lowest for fondaparinux 2.5 mg / 0.5 ml injection (20%). Among the commonly prescribed drugs that are under Drugs Prices Control Order (DPCO) price control, streptokinase 1.5 MIU injection had the highest cost variation (132.02%) while enoxaparin 60 mg / 0.6 ml injection had the lowest (4.99%). Among some of the important formulations under the Jan Aushadhi scheme (JAS), acenocoumarol 2 mg tablet had the highest cost variation (680.09%) and cilostazol 50 mg tablet had the lowest (55.46%). Conclusions Wide differences exist in the costs of various anticoagulants, antiplatelets, and fibrinolytics available in the Indian market. The prescribing physician should be aware of theses variations and prescribe medicines accordingly, keeping in mind the financial status of the patients.

Economic Analyses of Surgical Trips to the Developing World: Current Concepts and Future Strategies.

The surgical burden of disease disproportionately affects individuals living in the developing world. In response, the surgical community has increased efforts to provide care to patients in these countries during short-term surgical trips. This article (1) summarizes the current concepts used in the economic evaluation of surgical outreach and (2) presents a conceptual model to describe the ideal approach to performing an economic analysis of surgical interventions in developing countries. This model may ensure that policymakers are provided with information to decrease cost and improve the access to specialty surgery in the developing world.

Bundled Payment Models in Spine Surgery: Current Challenges and Opportunities, a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments offer a lump sum for management of particular conditions over a specified period that has the potential to reduce health care payments. In addition, bundled payments represent a shift toward patient-centered reimbursement, which has the upside of improved care coordination among providers and may lead to improved outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To review the challenges and sources of payment variation and opportunities for restructuring bundled payments plans in the context of spine surgery. METHODS: We reviewed episodes of care over the past 10 years. We completed a search using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and the PICOS (Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study Design) model in PubMed and Ovid databases to identify studies that met our search criteria. RESULTS: Ten studies met the search criteria, which were retrospective in design. The primary recipient of reimbursement was the hospital associated with the index procedure (59.7%-77% of the bundled payment), followed by surgeon reimbursement (12.8%-14%) and post-acute care rehabilitation (3.6%-7.3%). On average, the index hospitalization was $32,467, ranging from $11,880 to $107,642, depending on number of levels fused, complications, and malignancy. Readmission was shown to increase the 90-day payment by 50%-200% for uncomplicated fusion. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of spine surgery in bundled payment models offers opportunity for health care cost reduction. Patient heterogeneity, complications, and index hospitalization pricing are among factors that contribute to the challenge of payment variation. Development of standard care pathways, multidisciplinary coordination between inpatient and outpatient postoperative care, and empowerment of patients are also key elements of progress in the evolution of bundled payments in spine surgery. We anticipate more individualized risk-adjusted prediction models of payment for spine surgery, contributing to more manageable variation in payment and favorable models of bundled payments for payers and providers.