Cost analysis in a Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine unit in Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the costs of a specialized service in Traditional Complementary and Integrative Medicines (TCIM) in Northeast Brazil to provide data on the cost linked to the implementation and maintenance of services of this nature and to identify the average cost per user for the Unified Health System. METHODS: This is a partial, descriptive, quantitative economic assessment, which used secondary data, later grouped in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The method used to analyze such costs was absorption costing, from which the service was divided into three costing centers: productive, administrative and auxiliary. RESULTS: After analyzing the data, the total cost of the service in 2014 was estimated at R$ 1,270,015.70, with a proportion of 79.69% of direct costs. The average cost per user in this period was R$ 36.79, considering the total of 34,521 users in individual and collective practices. CONCLUSIONS: The service has a cost per user compatible with a specialized service; however, TCIM offers a comprehensive and holistic approach, which can have a positive impact on quality of life.

Cost analysis in a traditional, complementary and integrative medicine unit in Brazil / Análise de custos em unidade de medicina tradicional, complementar e integrativa no Brasil

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To analyze the costs of a specialized service in Traditional Complementary and Integrative Medicines (TCIM) in Northeast Brazil to provide data on the cost linked to the implementation and maintenance of services of this nature and to identify the average cost per user for the Unified Health System. METHODS This is a partial, descriptive, quantitative economic assessment, which used secondary data, later grouped in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The method used to analyze such costs was absorption costing, from which the service was divided into three costing centers: productive, administrative and auxiliary. RESULTS After analyzing the data, the total cost of the service in 2014 was estimated at R$ 1,270,015.70, with a proportion of 79.69% of direct costs. The average cost per user in this period was R$ 36.79, considering the total of 34,521 users in individual and collective practices. CONCLUSIONS The service has a cost per user compatible with a specialized service; however, TCIM offers a comprehensive and holistic approach, which can have a positive impact on quality of life.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Analisar os custos de um serviço especializado em Medicinas Tradicionais Complementares e Integrativas (MTCI) no Nordeste brasileiro, com o intuito de fornecer dados sobre o custo atrelado à implantação e manutenção de serviços dessa natureza e identificar o custo médio por usuário para o Sistema Único de Saúde. MÉTODOS Trata-se de uma avaliação econômica do tipo parcial, com caráter descritivo, de natureza quantitativa, que utilizou dados secundários, posteriormente agrupados em planilhas do Microsoft Excel. O método utilizado para analisar tais custos foi o de custeio por absorção, a partir do qual o serviço foi dividido em três centros de custeio: produtivo, administrativo e auxiliar. RESULTADOS Após a análise dos dados, o custo total do serviço em 2014 foi estimado em R$ 1.270.015,70, com proporção de 79,69% de custos diretos. O custo médio por usuário neste período foi R$ 36,79, considerando o total de 34.521 usuários em práticas individuais e coletivas. CONCLUSÕES O serviço apresenta um custo por usuário compatível com um serviço especializado, contudo, as MTCI oferecem abordagem compreensiva e holística, as quais podem impactar de forma positiva a qualidade de vida.

Complementary medicine use and costs in patients with breast cancer who experienced treatment-related side effects: A cross-sectional survey in Korea.

OBJECTIVES: Population-based information on the costs of complementary medicine for treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer is scarce. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and expenditure on complementary medicine in patients with breast cancer who experienced treatment-related side effects. DESIGN AND SETTING: Two datasets were analyzed: 1) a 2017 survey on direct and indirect costs for treatment-related side effects, which was completed by 100 patients with stage 0-IV breast cancer, and 2) a Korean representative cross-sectional survey (Patient Survey 2014) that examined the prevalence of integrative medicine in 41 patients with breast cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The direct and indirect costs for treatment-related side effects. RESULTS: In the first dataset, the mean total direct medical cost for complementary medicine was US$1,584 and the mean indirect cost was US$6,988 per patient per year. Some patients (6%) visited non-medical institutions to utilize complementary medicine and additionally spent US$460 per patient per year. Approximately one-third of participants reported a substantial-to-heavy financial burden for using complementary medicine. However, only 17% of patients got information about complementary medicine through their physician. In the second dataset, 49% of patients with breast cancer who were discharged from Korean Medicine hospitals in Patient Survey 2014 data indicated that integrative medicine had been used. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some complementary medicine could be reimbursed by National Health Insurance in Korea, a considerable number of patients reported an economic burden associated with their use of complementary medicine. Strategies for guiding patients to receive evidence-based and cost-effective complementary medicine are needed.

The effectiveness of integrative healthcare for chronic disease: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The past few decades have witnessed a surge in consumer, clinician and academic interest in the field of integrative healthcare (IHC). Yet, there is still uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of IHC for complex, long-term health conditions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of IHC for the management of any chronic health condition. METHODS: Seven databases and four clinical trial registries were searched from inception through to May 2018 for comparative/controlled clinical trials investigating the effectiveness of IHC for any chronic disease, and assessing any outcome. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. RESULTS: The search yielded 6,926 results. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies had at least three design features that carried an uncertain/high risk of bias. Differences in physiological, psychological and functional outcomes, and quality of life between patients receiving IHC and patients receiving conventional/usual care were varied and inconsistent. Changes in patient satisfaction with care were inconclusive. No studies reported the effectiveness of IHC on workforce- or administration-related parameters. Evidence from one trial suggested IHC may be more cost-effective than conventional care. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate some promising effects for the use of IHC to manage chronic disease. However, the uncertain/high risk of bias across multiple domains, diverse and inconsistent findings, and heterogeneity of outcome measures and study populations prevents firm conclusions from being reached. Along with conducting further well-designed, long-term studies in this field, there is a need to ensure interventions closely align with the definition/principles of IHC.

The Cost Effectiveness of Embedding a Behavioral Health Clinician into an Existing Primary Care Practice to Facilitate the Integration of Care: A Prospective, Case-Control Program Evaluation.

This project evaluated the cost effectiveness of integrating behavioral health services into a primary care practice using a prospective, case-control design. New Directions Behavioral Health collaborated with a large Kansas City primary care practice to integrate a licensed psychologist (i.e., behavioral health clinician) into the practice. Patient claims data were examined 21 months prior to and 14 months after the psychologist began providing full-time behavioral health services within the practice. Claims data from patients with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City insurance (BCBSKC) who had at least one encounter with the psychologist (N = 239) were compared to control patients (BCBSKC fully insured patients at large) to calculate cost savings. The results demonstrated that integrating behavioral health services into the practice was associated with $860.16 per member per year savings or 10.8% savings in costs for BCBSKC patients. Integrating behavioral health services into primary care may lead to reductions in health care costs.

Acceptance, satisfaction and cost of an integrative anthroposophic program for pediatric respiratory diseases in a Swiss teaching hospital: An implementation report.

BACKGROUND: For the pilot phase of an integrative pediatric program, we defined inpatient treatment algorithms for bronchiolitis, asthma and pneumonia, using medications and nursing techniques from anthroposophic medicine (AM). Parents could choose AM treatment as add-on to conventional care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To evaluate the 18-month pilot phase, parents of AM users were asked to complete the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) and a questionnaire on the AM treatment. Staff feedback was obtained through an open-ended questionnaire. Economic data for project set-up, medications and insurance reimbursements were collected. RESULTS: A total of 351 children with bronchiolitis, asthma and pneumonia were hospitalized. Of these, 137 children (39%) received AM treatment, with use increasing over time. 52 parents completed the questionnaire. Mean CSQ-8 score was 29.77 (95% CI 29.04-30.5) which is high in literature comparison. 96% of parents were mostly or very satisfied with AM; 96% considered AM as somewhat or very helpful for their child; 94% considered they learnt skills to better care for their child. The staff questionnaire revealed positive points about enlarged care offer, closer contact with the child, more relaxed children and greater role for parents; weak points included insufficient knowledge of AM and additional nursing time needed. Cost for staff training and medications were nearly compensated by AM related insurance reimbursements. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of anthroposophic treatments were well-accepted and led to high parent satisfaction. Additional insurance reimbursements outweighed costs. The program has now been expanded into a center for integrative pediatrics.

Comparative cost analysis of inpatient integrative medicine-Results of a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Costs of integrative treatment alone and in comparison with other treatment approaches have scarcely been reported in the past. This study presents results of a comparative cost analysis of an inpatient integrative medicine treatment costs. METHODS: Data from 2006 for inpatients referred to a Department of Integrative Medicine in Germany were used. Case-related treatment costs were calculated, and transformed into Casemix-Indices and revenues per DRG. Costs were compared between departments at the same hospital and between different hospitals using univariate statistics and Chi-Square tests. RESULTS: In total 1253 inpatients (81.4% female, 61.1±14.4years) were included in the current analysis. Most patients were treated for diseases of the musculoskeletal system (57.2%), followed by diseases of the digestive system (11.4%), and diseases of the nervous system (10.4%). The department received an additional payment for most of the patients (88.0%), which led to an effective appreciation of 10.8% per case compared to the standardized Casemix-Index. In-house comparisons with other departments found the department in close vicinity to the departments of Internal medicine with regards to CMI and mean revenue, however the Patient Clinical Complexity Level was significantly lower in the Integrative medicine department. The interhospital comparison revealed comparable Casemix-Index and DRG-revenue, however the additional payment increased the mean revenue significantly. CONCLUSION: Modern integrative in-patient treatment is mostly cost-equivalent to conventional treatment. Cost effectiveness studies should be considered to further investigate the potential of integrative in patient treatment.

Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education: Competency and Curriculum Development for Preventive Medicine and Other Specialty Residency Programs.

During 2012, the USDHHS's Health Resources and Services Administration funded 12 accredited preventive medicine residencies to incorporate an evidence-based integrative medicine curriculum into their training programs. It also funded a national coordinating center at the American College of Preventive Medicine, known as the Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education (IMPriME) Center, to provide technical assistance to the 12 grantees. To help with this task, the IMPriME Center established a multidisciplinary steering committee, versed in integrative medicine, whose primary aim was to develop integrative medicine core competencies for incorporation into preventive medicine graduate medical education training. The competency development process was informed by central integrative medicine definitions and principles, preventive medicine's dual role in clinical and population-based prevention, and the burgeoning evidence base of integrative medicine. The steering committee considered an interdisciplinary integrative medicine contextual framework guided by several themes related to workforce development and population health. A list of nine competencies, mapped to the six general domains of competence approved by the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, was operationalized through an iterative exercise with the 12 grantees in a process that included mapping each site's competency and curriculum products to the core competencies. The competencies, along with central curricular components informed by grantees' work presented elsewhere in this supplement, are outlined as a roadmap for residency programs aiming to incorporate integrative medicine content into their curricula. This set of competencies adds to the larger efforts of the IMPriME initiative to facilitate and enhance further curriculum development and implementation by not only the current grantees but other stakeholders in graduate medical education around integrative medicine training.

Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education: Implementation Analysis.

In September 2012, the Health Resources and Services Administration funded 12 preventive medicine residency programs to participate in a 2-year project aimed at incorporating integrative medicine (IM) into their residency training programs. The grantees were asked to incorporate competencies for IM into their respective preventive medicine residency curricula and to provide for faculty development in IM. The analysis conducted in 2014-2015 used the following evidence to assess residency programs' achievements and challenges in implementation: progress and performance measures reports, curriculum mapping of program activities to IM competencies, records of webinar participation, and post-project individual semi-structured phone interviews with the 12 grantee project leaders. Key findings are: (1) IM activities offered to residents increased by 50% during the 2 years; (2) Accessing IM resources already in existence at local grantee sites was the primary facilitator of moving the integration of IM into preventive medicine residencies forward; (3) Among all activities offered residents, rotations were perceived by grantees as by far the most valuable contributor to acquiring IM competencies; (4) Online training was considered a greater contributor to preventive medicine residents' medical knowledge in IM than faculty lectures or courses; (5) Faculty were offered a rich variety of opportunities for professional development in IM, but some programs lacked a system to ensure faculty participation; and (6) Perceived lack of evidence for IM was a barrier to full program implementation at some sites. Grantees expect implemented programs to continue post-funding, but with decreased intensity owing to perceived faculty and curriculum time constraints.

Integrative Medicine in a Preventive Medicine Residency: A Program for the Urban Underserved.

The Preventive Medicine Residency Program collaborated with the Department of Family Medicine's Program for Integrative Medicine and Health Disparities at Boston Medical Center to create a new rotation for preventive medicine residents starting in autumn 2012. Residents participated in integrative medicine group visits and consults, completed an online curriculum in dietary supplements, and participated in seminars all in the context of an urban safety net hospital. This collaboration was made possible by a federal Health Resources and Services Administration grant for integrative medicine in preventive medicine residencies and helped meet a need of the program to increase residents' exposure to clinical preventive medicine and integrative health clinical skills and principles. The collaboration has resulted in a required rotation for all residents that continues after the grant period and has fostered additional collaborations related to integrative medicine across the programs.

Project ASPIRE: Incorporating Integrative Medicine Into Residency Training.

Griffin Hospital, a community hospital affiliated with Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine, received Health Resources and Services Administration funding to strengthen and improve its combined internal medicine and general preventive medicine residency program by incorporating an integrative medicine curriculum. The purpose of project ASPIRE (Advancing Skills of Preventive medicine residents through Integrative medicine Education, Research and Evaluation) was to create, implement, and evaluate a needs-based, innovative training curriculum in integrative medicine. Through this robust new training, the authors aimed to produce preventive medicine-trained physicians with competencies in integrative medicine to collaboratively work with other integrative medicine practitioners in interdisciplinary teams to provide holistic, patient-centered care. The multifaceted collaborative curriculum was composed of didactics, grand rounds, journal club, objective structured clinical examinations, and two new practicum rotations in integrative medicine. The new practicum rotations included block rotations at the Integrative Medicine Center at Griffin Hospital and the Yale Stress Center. Between 2012 and 2014, three cohorts participated in the curriculum; two of these cohorts included three advanced preventive medicine residents each and the fourth included four residents. Project faculty conducted 14 lectures and journal clubs, and two grand rounds. Six of the ten participating residents (60%) completed integrative medicine clinical rotations. Residents' attitudes toward integrative medicine were evaluated through self-assessment using the Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Attitudes Questionnaire; data were analyzed in 2015. This article describes the results of this prospective observational study based on single-institution experience over the course of the 2-year project period.

Using hospital data and routines to estimate costs and effects of integrative care programmes for chronic pain and stress disorders--a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence of cost and effects for comprehensive hospital-based integrative care (IC) is scarce. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of using local hospital data and routines to estimate costs and effects of anthroposophic IC programmes for chronic pain and stress disorders in Sweden. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of one IC hospital's local administrative registry data. Main outcomes embraced patient demographics, programme duration and costs, patients' health status (EQ-5D index, 0-1) and self-rated health (EQ-5D VAS, 0-100), from hospital admittance to discharge. The use of postal questionnares for collecting follow-up data after hospital discharge was assessed. RESULTS: The IC pain programme had 461 records, all with complete data on costs and duration: average programme cost, EUR 5,925 (95% CI 5,780-6,070), and duration, 17.8 (SD 4.7) days. The IC stress programme had 263 records, all with complete cost and duration data: programme cost, EUR 5,494 (95%CI 5,318-5,671); duration 18.0 (SD 4.7) days. From admittance to discharge, health status improved by 0.23 (95% CI 0.19-0.27) in the pain, and by 0.16 (95% CI 0.12-0.20) in the stress programme. Improvements in self-rated health were 20 (95% CI 18-22), and 21 (95% CI 18-23), respectively. There was a general decrease in questionnaire response rate after hospital discharge, whereby 27-32% of respondents had completed data after 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible to use hospital registry data to estimate costs and show positive effects of anthroposophic IC programmes for pain and stress disorders in Sweden. Clinical implications and the need for long-term follow-up are discussed.

Opposite drug prescription and cost trajectories following integrative and conventional care for pain--a case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: Pharmacotherapy may have a limited role in long-term pain management. Comparative trajectories of drug prescriptions and costs, two quality-of-care indicators for pain conditions, are largely unknown subsequent to conventional or integrative care (IC) management. The objectives of this study were to compare prescribed defined daily doses (DDD) and cost of first line drugs for pain patients referred to conventional or anthroposophic IC in Stockholm County, Sweden. METHODS: In this retrospective high quality registry case-control study, IC and conventional care patients were identified through inpatient care registries and matched on pain diagnosis (ICD-10: M79), age, gender and socio-demographics. National drug registry data was used to investigate changes in DDD and costs from 90/180 days before, to 90/180 days after, index visits to IC and conventional care. The primary selected drug category was analgesics, complemented by musculo-skeletal system drugs (e.g. anti-inflammatories, muscle relaxants) and psycholeptics (e.g. hypnotics, sedatives). RESULTS: After index care visits, conventional care pain patients (n = 1050) compared to IC patients (n = 213), were prescribed significantly more analgesics. The average (95% CI) group difference was 15.2 (6.0 to 24.3), p = 0.001, DDD/patient after 90 days; and 21.5 (7.4 to 35.6), p = 0.003, DDD/patient after 180 days. The cost of the prescribed and sold analgesics was significantly higher for conventional care after 90 days: euro/patient 10.7 (1.3 to 20.0), p = 0.025. Changes in drug prescription and costs for the other drug categories were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Drug prescriptions and costs of analgesics increased following conventional care and decreased following IC, indicating potentially fewer adverse drug events and beneficial societal cost savings with IC.

IMPACT--Integrative Medicine PrimAry Care Trial: protocol for a comparative effectiveness study of the clinical and cost outcomes of an integrative primary care clinic model.

BACKGROUND: Integrative medicine (IM) is a patient-centered, healing-oriented clinical paradigm that explicitly includes all appropriate therapeutic approaches whether they originate in conventional or complementary medicine (CM). While there is some evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of IM practice models, the existing evidence base for IM depends largely on studies of individual CM therapies. This may in part be due to the methodological challenges inherent in evaluating a complex intervention (i.e., many interacting components applied flexibly and with tailoring) such as IM. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will use a combination of observational quantitative and qualitative methods to rigorously measure the health and healthcare utilization outcomes of the University of Arizona Integrative Health Center (UAIHC), an IM adult primary care clinic in Phoenix, Arizona. There are four groups of study participants. The primary group consists of clinic patients for whom clinical and cost outcomes will be tracked indicating the impact of the UAIHC clinic (n = 500). In addition to comparing outcomes pre/post clinic enrollment, where possible, these outcomes will be compared to those of two matched control groups, and for some self-report measures, to regional and national data. The second and third study groups consist of clinic patients (n = 180) and clinic personnel (n = 15-20) from whom fidelity data (i.e., data indicating the extent to which the IM practice model was implemented as planned) will be collected. These data will be analyzed to determine the exact nature of the intervention as implemented and to provide covariates to the outcomes analyses as the clinic evolves. The fourth group is made up of patients (n = 8) whose path through the clinic will be studied in detail using qualitative (periodic semi-structured interviews) methods. These data will be used to develop hypotheses regarding how the clinic works. DISCUSSION: The US health care system needs new models of care that are more patient-centered and empower patients to make positive lifestyle changes. These models have the potential to reduce the burden of chronic disease, lower the cost of healthcare, and offer a sustainable financial paradigm for our nation. This protocol has been designed to test whether the UAIHC can achieve this potential. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01785485.

A hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of an evidence-based exercise intervention for breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The primary aims of this hybrid Type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial were to quantitatively assess whether an evidence-based exercise intervention for breast cancer survivors, Strength After Breast Cancer, was safe and effective in a new setting and to qualitatively assess barriers to implementation. METHODS: A cohort of 84 survivors completed measurements related to limb volume, muscle strength, and body image at baseline, 67 survivors completed measurements 12 months later. Qualitative methods were used to understand barriers to implementation experienced by referring oncology clinicians and physical therapists who delivered the program. RESULTS: Similar to the efficacy trial, the revised intervention demonstrated safety with regard to lymphedema, and led to improvements in lymphedema symptoms, muscular strength, and body image. Comparison of effects in the effectiveness trial to effects in the efficacy trial revealed larger strength increases in the efficacy trial than in the effectiveness trial (P < .04), but few other differences were found. Qualitative implementation data suggested significant barriers around intervention characteristics, payment, eligibility criteria, the referral process, the need for champions (ie, advocates), and the need to adapt during implementation of the intervention, which should be considered in future dissemination and implementation efforts. CONCLUSIONS: This trial successfully demonstrated that a physical therapy led strength training program for breast cancer survivors can be implemented in a community setting while retaining the effectiveness and safety of the clinical trial. However, during the translation process, strategies to reduce barriers to implementation are required. This new program can inform larger scale dissemination and implementation efforts.