Thematic Analysis of Challenges of Care Coordination for Underinsured and Uninsured Cancer Survivors With Chronic Conditions.

Importance: Although a majority of underinsured and uninsured patients with cancer have multiple comorbidities, many lack consistent connections with a primary care team to manage chronic conditions during and after cancer treatment. This presents a major challenge to delivering high-quality comprehensive and coordinated care. Objective: To describe challenges and opportunities for coordinating care in an integrated safety-net system for patients with both cancer and other chronic conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multimodal qualitative study was conducted from May 2016 to July 2019 at a county-funded, vertically integrated safety-net health system including ambulatory oncology, urgent care, primary care, and specialty care. Participants were 93 health system stakeholders (clinicians, leaders, clinical, and administrative staff) strategically and snowball sampled for semistructured interviews and observation during meetings and daily processes of care. Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively using a grounded theory approach, followed by systematic thematic analysis to organize data, review, and interpret comprehensive findings. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multilevel factors associated with experiences of coordinating care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions among oncology and primary care stakeholders. Results: Among interviews and observation of 93 health system stakeholders, system-level factors identified as being associated with care coordination included challenges to accessing primary care, lack of communication between oncology and primary care clinicians, and leadership awareness of care coordination challenges. Clinician-level factors included unclear role delineation and lack of clinician knowledge and preparedness to manage the effects of cancer and chronic conditions. Conclusions and Relevance: Primary care may play a critical role in delivering coordinated care for patients with cancer and chronic diseases. This study's findings suggest a need for care delivery strategies that bridge oncology and primary care by enhancing communication, better delineating roles and responsibilities across care teams, and improving clinician knowledge and preparedness to care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions. Expanding timely access to primary care is also key, albeit challenging in resource-limited safety-net settings.

Ambulatory specialist costs and morbidity of coordinated and uncoordinated patients before and after abolition of copayment: A cohort analysis.

To strengthen the coordinating function of general practitioners (GPs) in the German healthcare system, a copayment of €10 was introduced in 2004. Due to a perceived lack of efficacy and a high administrative burden, it was abolished in 2012. The present cohort study investigates characteristics and differences of GP-coordinated and uncoordinated patients in Bavaria, Germany, concerning morbidity and ambulatory specialist costs and whether these differences have changed after the abolition of the copayment. We performed a retrospective routine data analysis, using claims data of the Bavarian Association of the Statutory Health Insurance Physicians during the period 2011-2012 (with copayment) and 2013-2016 (without copayment), covering 24 quarters. Coordinated care was defined as specialist contact only with referral. Multinomial regression modelling, including inverse probability of treatment weighting, was used for the cohort analysis of 500 000 randomly selected patients. Longitudinal regression models were calculated for cost estimation. Coordination of care decreased substantially after the abolition of the copayment, accompanied by increasing proportions of patients with chronic and mental diseases in the uncoordinated group, and a corresponding decrease in the coordinated group. In the presence of the copayment, uncoordinated patients had €21.78 higher specialist costs than coordinated patients, increasing to €24.94 after its abolition. The results indicate that patients incur higher healthcare costs for specialist ambulatory care when their care is uncoordinated. This effect slightly increased after abolition of the copayment. Beyond that, the abolition of the copayment led to a substantial reduction in primary care coordination, particularly affecting vulnerable patients. Therefore, coordination of care in the ambulatory setting should be strengthened.

Home-based versus outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation program for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although home-based pulmonary rehabilitation programs have been shown in some studies to be an alternative and effective model, there is a lack of consensus in the medical literature due to different study designs and lack of standardization among procedures. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of a home-based versus outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation program for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Five electronic databases including Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library will be searched in May 2021 by 2 independent reviewers. The reference lists of the included studies will be also checked for additional studies that are not identified with the database search. There is no restriction on the dates of publication or language in the search. The randomized controlled trials focusing on comparing home-based and outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD patients will be included in our meta-analysis. The following outcomes should have been measured: functional exercise capacity, disease-specific health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness measures. Risk ratio with a 95% confidence interval or standardized mean difference with 95% CI is assessed for dichotomous outcomes or continuous outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: It was hypothesized that these 2 methods would provide similar therapeutic benefits. REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/5CV48.

Expenditures among young adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia by site of care.

BACKGROUND: Individuals diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) between the ages of 22 and 39 years experience worse outcomes than those diagnosed when they are 21 years old or younger. Treatment at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCC) mitigates these disparities but may be associated with higher expenditures. METHODS: Using deidentified administrative claims data (OptumLabs Data Warehouse), the cancer-related expenditures were examined among patients with ALL diagnosed between 2001 and 2014. Multivariable generalized linear model with log-link modeled average monthly health-plan-paid (HPP) expenditures and amount owed by the patient (out-of-pocket [OOP]). Cost ratios were used to calculate excess expenditures (CCC vs non-CCC). Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) compared CCC and non-CCC monthly visit rates. Models adjusted for sociodemographics, comorbidities, adverse events, and months enrolled. RESULTS: Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics were comparable between CCC (n = 160) and non-CCC (n = 139) patients. Higher monthly outpatient expenditures in CCC patients ($15,792 vs $6404; P < .001) were driven by outpatient hospital HPP expenditures. Monthly visit rates and per visit expenditures for nonchemotherapy visits (IRR = 1.6; P = .001; CCC = $8247, non-CCC = $1191) drove higher outpatient hospital expenditures among CCCs. Monthly OOP expenditures were higher at CCCs for outpatient care (P = .02). Inpatient HPP expenditures were significantly higher at CCCs ($25,918 vs $13,881; ꞵ = 0.9; P < .001) before accounting for adverse events but were no longer significant after adjusting for adverse events (ꞵ = 0.4; P = .1). Hospitalizations and length of stay were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Young adults with ALL at CCCs have higher expenditures, likely reflecting differences in facility structure, billing practices, and comprehensive patient care. It would be reasonable to consider CCCs comparable to the oncology care model and incentivize the framework to achieve superior outcomes and long-term cost savings. LAY SUMMARY: Health care expenditures in young adults (aged 22-39 years) with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are higher among patients at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCC) than those at non-CCCs. The CCC/non-CCC differences are significant among outpatient expenditures, which are driven by higher rates of outpatient hospital visits and outpatient hospital expenditures per visit at CCCs. Higher expenditures and visit rates of outpatient hospital visits among CCCs may also reflect how facility structure and billing patterns influence spending or comprehensive care. Young adults at CCCs face higher inpatient HPP expenditures; these are driven by serious adverse events.

Implementation and Outcomes of Virtual Care Across a Tertiary Cancer Center During COVID-19.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has burdened health care resources and disrupted care of patients with cancer. Virtual care (VC) represents a potential solution. However, few quantitative data support its rapid implementation and positive associations with service capacity and quality. Objective: To examine the outcomes of a cancer center-wide virtual care program in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study applied a hospitalwide agile service design to map gaps and develop a customized digital solution to enable at-scale VC across a publicly funded comprehensive cancer center. Data were collected from a high-volume cancer center in Ontario, Canada, from March 23 to May 22, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures were care delivery volumes, quality of care, patient and practitioner experiences, and cost savings to patients. Results: The VC solution was developed and launched 12 days after the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 22 085 VC visits (mean, 514 visits per day) were conducted, comprising 68.4% (range, 18.8%-100%) of daily visits compared with 0.8% before launch (P < .001). Ambulatory clinic volumes recovered a month after deployment (3714-4091 patients per week), whereas chemotherapy and radiotherapy caseloads (1943-2461 patients per week) remained stable throughout. No changes in institutional or provincial quality-of-care indexes were observed. A total of 3791 surveys (3507 patients and 284 practitioners) were completed; 2207 patients (82%) and 92 practitioners (72%) indicated overall satisfaction with VC. The direct cost of this initiative was CAD$ 202 537, and displacement-related cost savings to patients totaled CAD$ 3 155 946. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that implementation of VC at scale at a high-volume cancer center may be feasible. An agile service design approach was able to preserve outpatient caseloads and maintain care quality, while rendering high patient and practitioner satisfaction. These findings may help guide the transformation of telemedicine in the post COVID-19 era.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I2 = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I2 = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I2 = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I2 = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

Hospital care pathway of women treated for Bartholin's gland abscess and budget impact analysis of outpatient management: A national hospital database analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Bartholin's gland abscesses cause severe pain and are a source of frequent emergency room visits. The most widespread treatment in France is incision-drainage during hospitalisation. A Word catheter, whose efficiency and safety would be identical, could be used without the need for hospitalisation, thus reducing the costs of Bartholin's gland abscess management. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: French hospital (PMSI) database 2016-2017. POPULATION: 3539 women with Bartholin's gland abscess. METHOD: From the PMSI database, we identified the population that was treated for incision-drainage of a Bartholin's gland abscess in 2016. We also looked for secondary hospitalisations occurring within 12 months of initial treatment of Bartholin's gland abscess using 2016 and 2017 PMSI database data. MAIN OUTCOME(S): The identified population was described in terms of age, hospitalisation, length of stay and readmissions within 12 months and provided a 5-year budget impact analysis of the use of the Word catheter in France from a National Health Insurance perspective. RESULTS: In 2016, 3539 women (36 +/- 11.8 years) were hospitalised for 3646 incisions of the major vestibular gland linked to a Bartholin's gland abscess. 11.38 % (403/3,539) underwent at least one new Bartholin's gland procedure during the following year. The use of the Word catheter would allow potential savings over 5 years of €7.4 million. CONCLUSION: The use of the Word catheter could be cost-saving. These results must be validated by a clinical research step evaluating efficiency in the French context, comparing the Word catheter and incision-drainage side-by-side.

Factors affecting utilisation of traditional Korean medical services by privately insured persons: a retrospective study using Korean Health Panel Survey (KHPS).

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to use the Korean Health Panel Survey (KHPS) data to identify the key factors that influence decisions regarding the use of traditional Korean medicine (TKM) by privately insured persons. DESIGN: A retrospective study on episodic KHPS data from 2009 to 2013. SETTING: Nationwide-based survey using the KHPS data. PARTICIPANTS: The study included outpatients aged ≥20 years who had used private medical insurance at least once during the 5 years of the survey. After excluding cases where TKM was not used and those with missing values, this study ultimately included 1874 patients. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The main dependent variable was TKM utilisation (number of outpatient visits and outpatient costs of TKM). We used multiple linear regression analysis to identify determinants of TKM while controlling for clustered errors. RESULTS: Approximately 6.1% (1874) of all doctor visits (30 982) were characterised as TKM services. For therapeutic purposes, TKM visits increased despite not being guaranteed in private health insurance (coefficient=3.0, p=0.045) and TKM outpatient costs decreased (coefficient=-0.3, p=0.001). Women used more therapeutic TKM services than men (coefficient=2.8, p<0.001). Older patient groups used more therapeutic TKM services than younger patient groups (coefficient=11.5, p=0.012), but paid less on outpatient costs than younger groups (coefficient=-1.0, p=0.001). For preventive services, sex and age were not statistically significant factors. Regardless of the purpose of the visit, the more chronic diseases, the more people who have previously experienced TKM service use more TKM services (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a policy to reduce services that are not guaranteed by private health insurance, the increase in the number of outpatient visits for uncovered therapeutic TKM services implies a high public need for TKM in Korea.

Analysis of Outpatient Telemedicine Reimbursement in an Integrated Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Current reimbursement policy surrounding telemedicine has been cited as a barrier for the adaptation of this care model. The objective of this study is to analyze the reimbursement figures for outpatient telemedicine consultation in vascular surgery. METHODS: Patients first underwent synchronous telemedicine visits after receiving point-of-care ultrasound at one of 3 satellite locations of Henry Ford Health System in Michigan. Visit types included new, return, and postoperative patients. Reimbursement information related to payor, adjustment, denial, paid and outstanding balances were recorded for each telemedicine visit. Then, using an enterprise data warehouse, a retrospective analysis was performed for the aforementioned telemedicine visits. The data were analyzed to determine the outcome of total billed charges, number of denied claims, reimbursement per payor, reimbursement per patient, and out-of-pocket costs to the patients. RESULTS: Among 184 virtual clinical encounters, the payors included Aetna US Healthcare, Blue Advantage, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cofinity Plan, Health Alliance Plan, HAP Medicare Advantage, Humana Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, Medicare, Molina Medicaid HMO, United Healthcare, Blue Care Network, Aetna Better Health of Michigan, Priority Health, and self-pay. Among the 15 payors, reimbursement ranged from 0% to 67% of the total charges billed. Among the 184 virtual visits, a grand total of $22,145 was collected or an average of $120.35 per virtual encounter. The breakdown of charges billed was 40% adjusted, 41% paid by insurance, 10% paid by patient, and 13% denied. There were 27 total denials (15%). Denial of payment included telehealth and nontelehealth reasons, citing noncovered charges, payment included for other prior services, new patient quality not met, and not covered by payor. The average out-of-pocket cost to patients was $12.59 per visit. CONCLUSIONS: These reimbursement data validate the economic potential within this new platform of healthcare delivery. As our experience with the business model grows, we expect to see an increase in reimbursement from private payors and acceptance from patients. Within a tertiary care system, telemedicine for chronic vascular disease has proven to be a viable means to reach a broader population base, and without significant cost to the patients.

Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD using minimal resources: An economic analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of home and centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation for adults with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Prospective economic analyses were undertaken from a health system perspective alongside a randomized controlled equivalence trial in which participants referred to pulmonary rehabilitation undertook a standard 8-week outpatient centre-based or a new home-based programme. Participants underwent clinical assessment prior to programme commencement, immediately following completion and 12 months following programme completion. They provided data for utility (quality-adjusted life years (QALY) determined using SF6D (utility scores for health states) calculated from 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2) and effectiveness (change in distance walked on 6-min walk test (Δ6MWD) following pulmonary rehabilitation ). Individual-level cost data for the 12 months following programme completion was sourced from healthcare administration and government databases. RESULTS: Between-group mean difference point estimates for cost (-$4497 (95% CI: -$12 250 to $3257), utility (0.025 (-0.038 to 0.086) QALY) and effectiveness (14 m (-11 to 39) Δ6MWD) favoured the home-based group. Cost-utility analyses demonstrated 63% of estimates falling in the dominant southeast quadrant and the probability that the new home-based model was cost-effective at a $0 threshold for willingness to pay was 78%. Results were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. Programme completion was associated with significantly lower healthcare costs in the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation provides a cost-effective alternative model for people with COPD who cannot access traditional centre-based programmes.

Assessment of Accuracy and Usability of a Fee Estimator for Ambulatory Care in an Integrated Health Care Delivery Network.

Importance: Given increased enrollment in high-deductible health insurance plans and mandates from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, individualized price transparency tools are needed. Objective: To assess accuracy and initial user experience of a cost estimation tool for ambulatory procedures delivered via an online patient portal and informed by real-time data feeds from third-party payers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study included patients aged 18 years and older at an integrated health care system in Northern California. Data from patients who used the cost estimator tool from August 21, 2018, to April 9, 2019, and who had matching explanation of benefits statements were used to assess accuracy of the tool. User experience was assessed with a brief survey completed online or via postal mail. Data were analyzed from April 15, 2019, to October 11, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Tool accuracy and user experience and satisfaction. Results: As of April 30, 2019, 4610 estimates (3569 [77.4%] via internet; 1041 [22.6%] via telephone) were produced using the cost estimator tool. Among 342 individuals who had an estimate and a matching explanation of benefits statement, 287 estimates (83.9%) were accurate. All 342 individuals with an estimate and an explanation of benefits statement were invited to participate in a user survey, and 125 individuals completed the survey (36.5% response rate). Survey respondents included 92 (73.6%) women, 72 (57.6%) non-Hispanic white participants , 91 participants (72.8%) with a college degree or higher, and 55 participants (44.0%) with an income of $100 000 per year or higher. Mean (SD) age was 46.8 (13.1) years. Ninety-nine participants (79.2%) found the tool easy to use, 109 participants (87.2%) would use it again, and 100 participants (80.0%) would recommend it to others. Seven participants (5.6%) reported contacting a clinician about the estimate, and 12 participants (9.6%) changed their decision based on the estimate. Conclusions and Relevance: This quality improvement study is the first report of an online cost estimator in an integrated health care delivery network. The findings suggest that the tool, informed by real-time data feeds from third-party payers, was easy to use and provided accurate results. Increasing the number of searchable services and sharing best practices with other health care systems who share the same portal platform are the next steps for the tool.

[Dronabinol in geriatric pain and palliative care patients : A retrospective evaluation of statutory-health-insurance-covered outpatient medical treatment]. / Dronabinol bei geriatrischen Schmerz- und Palliativpatienten : Eine retrospektive Auswertung der ambulanten kassenärztlichen Therapie.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric patients often suffer from a long history of pain and have a limited life expectancy. Cannabinoid receptor agonists like dronabinol may be an effective, low-risk treatment option for geriatric patients with chronic pain. OBJECTIVES: The effectiveness and side effects of dronabinol therapy in geriatric patients are analyzed. The effects of the approval requirement are presented. METHODS: In our retrospective monocentric cohort study, the study population comprised all geriatric patients over the age of 80 years who were treated in our office since the cannabis law came into effect on 10 March 2017 until 17 July 2018 (evaluation date). Geriatric, nonpalliative pain patients (group A) and geriatric palliative patients (group B) were investigated. The basis of the evaluation was a questionnaire sheet that we use in our office with details of dosages, pain intensity, treatment effects and side effects from dronabinol therapy. RESULTS: By using dronabinol, 21 of the 40 geriatric patients (52.5%) achieved pain relief of more than 30%, 10% of the patients of more than 50%. On average, about four symptoms or side effects related to previous treatment were positively influenced. 26% of patients reported side effects. The rejection rates on the part of the health insurances were 38.7% (group A) and 10.3% (group B). CONCLUSIONS: This study is one of the few analyses of the use of Dronabinol in geriatric patients. We show that cannabis-based drugs (in this case dronabinol) are an effective, low-risk treatment option that should be considered early in therapy. Regarding the indication spectrum, further clinical studies and an approval-free test phase are necessary.

Health economics for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis of eight skin substitutes.

AIM: Skin substitutes are frequently used to treat chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), and many different options are available. While the clinical efficacy of many products has been evaluated, a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the most popular skin substitutes and using the most recent cost data has been lacking. METHODS: This study compared eight skin substitutes using published efficacy rates combined with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) 2018 cost data. The study criteria resulted in the inclusion of seven studies that described efficacy rates for treatment of DFUs using the skin substitutes. RESULTS: The results revealed wide discrepancies between these skin substitutes for the costs of treatments and healing rates in hospital outpatient departments and physician office settings. Healing rates for 12 and 16 weeks ranged from 28% to 68%, while the average cost for treating one DFU varied from $2001 to $14,507 and $1207 to $8791 in the hospital outpatient department and physician's office setting, respectively. The estimated patient share of costs for treating a single DFU ranged from $400 to $2901 and $241 to $1758 in the hospital outpatient department and physician's office setting, respectively. Most importantly, the estimated number of wounds healed out of 100 DFUs per $1000 expenditure with each patient ranged from 3.9-26.5 DFUs in the hospital outpatient department, and 4.3-36.4 DFUs in the physicians' office setting. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that the costs of a skin substitute itself did not necessarily correlate with its healing efficacy. These results provide a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis to enable integrated health-care systems, health professionals and reimbursement payers to make informed value decisions when treating DFUs.

Defining Optimal Care for Functional Gut Disorders - Multi-Disciplinary Versus Standard Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are the commonest reason for gastroenterological consultation, with patients usually seen by a specialist working in isolation. There is a wealth of evidence testifying to the benefit provided by dieticians, behavioral therapists, hypnotherapists and psychotherapists in treating these conditions, yet they rarely form a part of the therapeutic team, and these treatment modalities are rarely offered as part of the therapeutic management. There has been little examination of different models of care for FGIDs. We hypothesize that multi-disciplinary integrated care is superior to standard specialist-based care in the treatment of functional gut disorders. METHODS: The "MANTRA" (Multidisciplinary Treatment for Functional Gut Disorders) study compares comprehensive multi-disciplinary outpatient care with standard hospital outpatient care. Consecutive new referrals to the gastroenterology and colorectal outpatient clinics of a single secondary and tertiary care hospital of patients with an FGID, defined by the Rome IV criteria, will be included. Patients will be prospectively randomized 2:1 to multi-disciplinary (gastroenterologist, gut-hypnotherapist, psychiatrist, behavioral therapist ('biofeedback') and dietician) or standard care (gastroenterologist or colorectal surgeon). Patients are assessed up to 12 months after completing treatment. The primary outcome is an improvement on a global assessment scale at the end of treatment. Symptoms, quality of life, psychological well-being, and healthcare costs are secondary outcome measures. DISCUSSION: There have been few studies examining how best to deliver care for functional gut disorders. The MANTRA study will define the clinical and cost benefits of two different models of care for these highly prevalent disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.govNCT03078634 Registered on Clinicaltrials.gov, completed recruitment, registered on March 13th 2017. Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been received by the St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne human research ethics committee (HREC-A 138/16). The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Protocol version 1.2.

Pilot of urgent care center evaluation for acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with chest pain and concern for potential coronary ischemia are frequently referred to the emergency department (ED), resulting in substantial resource utilization and cost. The objective of this study was to implement a protocol for urgent care center (UCC) evaluation of potential acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and describe its performance. STUDY DESIGN: This is a descriptive, retrospective review of consecutive cases included in a protocol for UCC evaluation of ACS. METHODS: Consecutive patient encounters from 4 urgent care facilities of our regional integrated health system were reviewed from a period spanning 4.5 months of the 2017 calendar year. The primary outcome was avoidance of an ED visit within 30 days of the index visit, and the primary safety outcome was serious adverse events (AEs) occurring in the UCC setting. RESULTS: There were 802 patients evaluated, with a median age of 55 years, and 58% were female. Seventy-three (9.1%) patients were referred to the ED or hospitalized for any reason at the index visit, 10 (1.2%) of whom were ultimately diagnosed with ACS. Within 30 days, 56 (7.7%) of the remaining 729 patients had ED visits or hospitalization for any reason, 2 (0.2%) of whom received a diagnosis of ACS. Overall, 673 (83.9%) patients were managed without any ED visit. No serious AEs were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial pilot data demonstrate the feasibility of an outpatient UCC evaluation for ACS without refuting the underlying premise of safety.

Workflow Requirements for Cost-of-Care Conversations in Outpatient Settings Providing Oncology or Primary Care: A Qualitative, Human-Centered Design Study.

Background: Patients prefer to discuss costs in the clinical setting, but physicians and teams may be unprepared to incorporate cost discussions into existing workflows. Objective: To understand and improve clinical workflows related to cost-of-care conversations. Design: Qualitative human-centered design study. Setting: 2 integrated health systems in the U.S. Pacific Northwest: a system-wide oncology service line and a system-wide primary care service line. Participants: Clinicians, clinical team members, operations staff, and patients. Measurements: Ethnographic observations were made at the integrated health systems, assessing barriers to and facilitators of discussing costs with patients. Three unique patient experiences of having financial concerns addressed in the clinic were designed. These experiences were refined after in-person interviews with patients (n = 20). Data were synthesized into a set of clinical workflow requirements. Results: Most patient cost concerns take 1 of 3 pathways: informing clinical care decision making, planning and budgeting concerns, and addressing immediate financial hardship. Workflow requirements include organizational recognition of the need for clinic-based cost-of-care conversations; access to cost and health plan benefit data to support each conversation pathway; clear team member roles and responsibilities for addressing cost-of-care concerns; a patient experience where cost questions are normal and each patient's preferences and privacy are respected; patients know who to go to with cost questions; patients' concerns are documented to minimize repetition to multiple team members; and patients learn their expected out-of-pocket costs before treatment begins. Limitation: Results may have limited generalizability to other health care settings, and the study did not test the effectiveness of the workflows developed. Conclusion: Clinic-based workflows for cost-of-care conversations that optimize patients' care experience require organizational commitment to addressing cost concerns, clear roles and responsibilities, appropriate and complete data access, and a team-based approach. Primary Funding Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Adequate Multivitamin Supplementation after Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass Results in a Decrease of National Health Care Costs: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with morbid obesity undergoing metabolic surgery are prone to develop vitamin and mineral deficiencies, which may worsen in time. In order to prevent these deficiencies after metabolic surgery, all patients are advised to take daily multivitamin supplementation. The aim of the study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of specially developed multivitamins (WLS Forte®) for metabolic surgery and over-the-counter (standard) multivitamin supplementation (sMVS). METHODS: This cost-effectiveness analysis was preformed alongside an RCT for the Netherlands. Between June 2011 and March 2012, a total of 148 patients were randomized to one tablet daily of either WLS Forte® or sMVS. The patients were followed for 12 months. Data on costs within the health sector and outside the health sector were collected. The primary outcome is financial and logistic advantages, in terms of less patient visits to the outpatient department and the relevant costs to the employer due to absenteeism. RESULTS: In total, 10 (14%) patients in the WLS Forte® group versus 23 (30%) patients in the sMVS group developed a deficiency. The costs for the WLS forte® supplement were €38 versus €23 for sMVS. Additional return visits and associated costs for medical staff were the largest costs, up to 43% in the sMVS group. Total costs for supplementation with sMVS were €243 versus €134 for WLS Forte®. CONCLUSION: Preventing deficiencies with WLS Forte® seem initially more expensive than sMVS. However, treatment with WLS Forte® resulted in less vitamin and mineral deficiencies, which eventually resulted in less overall costs.

Evaluation of the intensive outpatient clinic: study protocol for a prospective study of high-cost, high-need patients in the University of Utah Health system.

INTRODUCTION: The University of Utah (UofU) Health intensive outpatient clinic (IOC) is a primary care clinic for medically complex (high-cost, high-need) patients with Medicaid. The clinic consists of a multidisciplinary care team aimed at providing coordinated, comprehensive and patient-centred care. The protocol outlines the quantitative design of an evaluation study to determine the IOC's effects on reducing healthcare utilisation and costs, as well as improving patient-reported health outcomes and quality of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: High-risk patients, with high utilisation and multiple chronic illnesses, were identified in the Medicaid ACO population managed by the UofU Health plans for IOC eligibility. A prospective, case-control study design is being used to match 100 IOC patients to 200 control patients (receiving usual care within the UofU) based on demographics, health utilisation and medical complexity for evaluating the primary outcome of change in healthcare utilisation and costs. For the secondary outcomes of patient health and care quality, a prepost design will be used to examine within-person change across the 18 months of follow-up (ie, before and after IOC intervention). Logistic regression and hierarchical, longitudinal growth modelling are the two primary modelling approaches. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This work has received ethics approval by the UofU Institutional Review Board. Results from the evaluation of primary and secondary outcomes will be disseminated in scientific research journals and presented at national conferences.

Comparison of outpatient reimbursement for interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis treatment in Taiwan: A nationwide population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared Taiwanese public health insurance outpatient reimbursements for interstitial cystitis (IC)/bladder pain syndrome (BPS) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. METHODS: This observational study used data from the Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database between 2002 and 2013. Patients with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for IC/BPS and RA were selected and matched in a ratio of 1 : 5 based on index year. After adjustment for possible confounders, including age, sex, income, hospital levels of care, and reimbursements for 24 comorbidities, yearly and per-visit pharmacy, non-pharmacy, and total claims were determined. RESULTS: In all, 1438 IC/BPS and 7190 RA patients were identified in the database. IC/BPS patients were significantly younger, and the proportion of females in this group was higher. Income levels were lower in the IC/BPS cohort, but not significantly. There were no significant differences between cohorts in terms of reimbursements for treatment for comorbidities, with the exception of end-stage renal disease, for which reimbursement was higher in the RA cohort. After adjusting for confounders, the regression coefficient for IC/BPS to RA was significantly lower for yearly total pharmacy claims, yearly total claims, per-visit pharmacy claims, and total claims per visit. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient reimbursement was significantly lower for IC/BPS than for RA treatment, primarily with regard to pharmacy costs. This indicates less medical utilization for IC/BPS, possibly due to poor treatment outcomes and copayment polices. Further advances in the treatment of IC/BPS and health budget reallocation are encouraged.

Systems Delivery Innovation for Alzheimer Disease.

OBJECTIVE: The authors describe a comprehensive care model for Alzheimer disease (AD) that improves value within 1-3 years after implementation by leveraging targeted outpatient chronic care management, cognitively protective acute care, and timely caregiver support. METHODS: Using current best evidence, expert opinion, and macroeconomic modeling, the authors designed a comprehensive care model for AD that improves the quality of care while reducing total per capita healthcare spending by more than 15%. Cost savings were measured as reduced spending by payers. Cost estimates were derived from medical literature and national databases, including both public and private U.S. payers. All estimates reflect the value in 2015 dollars using a consumer price index inflation calculator. Outcome estimates were determined at year 2, accounting for implementation and steady-state intervention costs. RESULTS: After accounting for implementation and recurring operating costs of approximately $9.5 billion, estimated net cost savings of between $13 and $41 billion can be accomplished concurrently with improvements in quality and experience of coordinated chronic care ($0.01-$6.8 billion), cognitively protective acute care ($8.7-$26.6 billion), timely caregiver support ($4.3-$7.5 billion), and caregiver efficiency ($4.1-$7.2 billion). CONCLUSION: A high-value care model for AD may improve the experience of patients with AD while significantly lowering costs.