Cost Analysis of Adjunctive Hydrocortisone Therapy for Septic Shock: U.S. Payer Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a cost analysis of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy for severe septic shock from the perspective of a third-party payer in the United States. DESIGN: Estimates of outcomes were aggregate data from the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock trials. In these trials, the outcomes of interests were ICU length of stay, vasopressor-free days, ventilation-free days, and the proportion of patients receiving blood transfusion. Each outcome was monetized into a set of mutually exclusive components and was aggregated to estimate the cost-per-patient based on each trial. Cost inputs for each outcome were obtained from literature and adjusted based on the medical care consumer price index. To estimate the budget impact using adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, per-patient avoided cost was multiplied by expected septic shock annual incidence. Deterministic one-way sensitivity analysis evaluated the robustness of the findings, and Monte Carlo simulation estimated 95% CI of the findings. SETTING: A total of 103 medical-surgical ICU (69 for Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and 34 for Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock). PATIENTS: Adults greater than or equal to 18 years old with septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: Adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy (hydrocortisone at a dose of 200 mg/d for 7 d for Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and hydrocortisone at a 50 mg IV bolus every 6 hr and fludrocortisone as a 50 µg tablet once daily). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Per Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock, adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy showed a 90-day monetized benefit of $8,111 (95% CI, $3,914-$12,307) per patient, driven by improvements in ICU-free days, vasopressor-free days, ventilation-free days, and blood transfusion proportion. The total estimated annual impact of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, in 2019 dollars, was $750 million. Per Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock, adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy showed a 90-day monetized benefit of $25,539 per patient (95% CI, $22,853-$28,224), driven by improvements in ICU free-days, vasopressor-free days, and ventilation-free days. The total estimated annual impact of adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy, in 2019 dollars, was $2.3 billion. The deterministic one-way sensitivity analysis showed the cost of ICU stays to be the most influential factor in both analyses. The sensitivity analysis using the reported median showed a greater monetized benefit of $10,658 (Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock) and $30,911 (Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock) per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Using adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy yields a significant monetized benefit based on inputs from the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock and Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock trials.

Implementing High-Value Care.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to assess physician knowledge of costs of products, tests, and services commonly used by obstetrician/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) and identify those items that could be eliminated without decreasing quality of care by performing a prospective observational pilot study. METHODS: An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 70 OB/GYN providers at Greenville Memorial Hospital. Survey items included common laboratory tests, medications, and clinical services. The survey was used to identify items with high cost for which there were less costly but equally efficacious alternatives. As an educational intervention, grand rounds reviewing the survey results, as well as recommendations that would allow for lean healthcare changes, were conducted. Utilization and cost savings were tracked for a 1-year preintervention and a 1-year postintervention. RESULTS: In total, 50 of 70 providers (71%) completed the survey. Hydrocortisone acetate/pramoxine hydrochloride and dinoprostone vaginal inserts were targeted for intervention. Use of the dinoprostone vaginal insert decreased 50.5% with a savings of $66,500 when comparing the preintervention period with the postintervention period. Use of hydrocortisone acetate/pramoxine hydrochloride decreased 90% with a savings of $92,655. Combined, the decreased use of these products led to a $159,155 cost savings in the 1-year postintervention period. CONCLUSIONS: OB/GYN providers at our institution had a poor working knowledge of costs. Through the use of a survey and educational intervention, we demonstrated that simple interventions could lead to high-quality, lean healthcare changes.

The cost-effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroids for patients with septic shock.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hydrocortisone is a cost-effective treatment for patients with septic shock. DESIGN: Data linkage-based cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: New South Wales and Queensland intensive care units. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Patients with septic shock randomly assigned to treatment with hydrocortisone or placebo in the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health-related quality of life at 6 months using the EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire. Data on hospital resource use and costs were obtained by linking the ADRENAL dataset to government administrative health databases. Clinical outcomes included mortality, health-related quality of life, and quality-adjusted life-years gained; economic outcomes included hospital resource use, costs and cost-effectiveness from the health care payer perspective. We also assessed cost-effectiveness by sex. To increase the precision of cost-effectiveness estimates, we conducted unrestricted bootstrapping. RESULTS: Of 3800 patients in the ADRENAL trial, 1772 (46.6%) were eligible and 1513 (85.4% of those eligible) were included. There was no difference between hydrocortisone or placebo groups in regards to mortality (218/742 [29.4%] v 227/759 [29.9%]; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.12; P = 0.47), mean number of QALYs gained (0.10 ± 0.09 v 0.10 ± 0.09; P = 0.52), or total hospital costs (A$73 515 ± 61 376 v A$69 748 ± 61 793; mean difference, A$3767; 95% CI, -A$2891 to A$10 425; P = 0.27). The incremental cost of hydrocortisone was A$1 254 078 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. In females, hydrocortisone was cost-effective in 46.2% of bootstrapped replications and in males it was cost-effective in 2.7% of bootstrapped replications. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive hydrocortisone did not significantly affect longer term mortality, health-related quality of life, health care resource use or costs, and is unlikely to be cost-effective.

A descriptive study of the effect of a disciplinary proceeding decision on medical practitioners' practice behaviour in the context of providing a hydrocortisone and lignocaine injection.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a descriptive study to evaluate any changes in practice behaviour regarding the provision of hydrocortisone and lignocaine (H&L) injections among doctors and how an H&L injection is priced following a disciplinary proceeding decision. A doctor had been fined SGD 100,000 for failing to obtain informed consent before an H&L injection. METHODS: We performed a survey shortly after the disciplinary decision to ascertain: (a) the category of the respondent; (b) whether the respondent provided H&L injections and how much he charged before the decision; and (c) after the decision. All members of the Singapore Medical Association and College of Family Physicians Singapore are doctors and were invited to participate. RESULTS: 1,927 doctors responded to the survey. Prior to the decision, 804 doctors did not perform H&L injections; this increased by 20.4% to 968 after the decision. The number of doctors who gave H&L injections decreased by 164 (14.6%), from the previous 1,123. Pre-decision, doctors who determined their own price for H&L injections charged a median pricing ≤ SGD 100. Post-decision, the median charge rose to > SGD 100 to SGD 200. At higher price bands, the number of doctors who charged > SGD 1,000 increased eight-fold, from eight to 65. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated how a disciplinary decision can affect practice behaviour, and specifically how doctors may choose to not offer a service, an example of defensive medicine through avoidance behaviour. It also showed how prices for a service can rise following such a decision, which demonstrates the concept of negative general deterrence in sentencing.

[Pharmaco-economic efficiency of the treatment of patients with acute vertebrogenic lumbar pain syndrome].

The aim of the study was to evaluate pharmaco-economic efficiency of two therapeutic schemes for the treatment of acute vertebrogenic lumbar pain syndrome. One hundred patients (including 77 women) with this syndrome caused by vertebral osteochondrosis (VO) were examined. Mean age of the patients was 41.00 +/- 8.33, mean duration of exacerbation 6.92 +/- 4.55 days. The majority of the patients had roentgenologic stage II VO. Patients of one group (n=50) were given intramuscular injections of ketorol (1 ml twice daily for 5 days) and diclofenac-retard (100 mg per os twice daily for 10 days). The second group (n=50) received ketorol and nise (100 mg twice daily for 10 days). This treatment was followed by 10 seances of phonophoresis using 1% hydrocortisone ointment. The clinical efficiency of therapy was evaluated based on the visual analog scale and in terms of Lasagne symptom, muscular syndrome index, Schober test, Thomayer's symptom, vertebrogenic syndrome coefficient. Pharmaco-economic analysis included calculation of direct medical care expenses and cost index/efficiency. The efficiency of therapy in group 2 (restoration of lumbar vertebral column mobility and alleviation of pain) was higher than in group 1 while the number of adverse effects was lower and the periods of remission longer. Combined therapy with ketorol and nise per unit efficiency was more expensive but the total cost of the management of one case including all yearly relapses suggested its advantages over the alternative treatment with ketorol and diclofenacin terms of clinical and pharmaco-economic efficiency.

Topical otic antibiotics: clinical cochlear ototoxicity and cost consideration.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the incidence of clinical cochlear ototoxicity in routine use of Cortisporin after ventilation tube placement. Cost differential between use of Cortisporin and fluoroquinolone agents was evaluated. METHODS: A retrospective review of 500 patients was performed. Cortisporin otic suspension was used for 5 days following ventilation tube insertion. RESULTS: Testing following surgery indicated a sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in 19 (2.1%) ears. The SNHL existed prior to the surgery and there was no deterioration in the hearing postoperatively. The total cost for our study group who used Cortisporin was $15,500. If Floxin had been prescribed the cost would have been $45,000. Had Ciprodex been prescribed, the cost would have been $49,500. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates no clinical cochlear ototoxicity in children who received Cortisporin following ventilation tube placement. The cost differential for prescribing fluoroquinolone drops is significant. EBM RATING: C-4.

Computerized reminders reduce the use of medications during shortages.

Medication shortages pose serious problems in health care. This study examines the impact of a computer-based reminder in addressing a national methylprednisolone shortage. An alert was designed and implemented in a computerized order entry platform at a children's hospital. The alert informed physicians of the shortage and provided an alternative prescribing pathway. Data regarding the number and type of parenteral corticosteroid prescriptions were collected for a one-month period before and after the alert was implemented. The alert resulted in a 55% relative reduction in methylprednisolone use and an average reduction of more than three orders each day. Dexamethasone and hydrocortisone, the recommended alternative medications, increased in use by 12% and 49%, respectively. The alert resulted in a $36,552 annualized cost reduction to the institution. Similar alert applications have great potential for effectively altering physician prescribing behavior.

Short-chain fatty acid enemas: a cost-effective alternative in the treatment of nonspecific proctosigmoiditis.

The purpose of this study was to perform a randomized, prospective comparison of corticosteroid enemas (CS--100 mg of hydrocortisone/60 cc P.R. q.h.s.; n = 12), mesalamine enemas (5-ASA--4 g/60 cc P.R. q.h.s.; n = 19), and short-chain fatty acid enemas (SCFA--60 cc P.R. b.i.d.; n = 14) for the treatment of proctosigmoiditis. Patients presenting to the Ferguson Clinic with the diagnosis of idiopathic proctosigmoiditis were evaluated for age, sex, prior history of proctitis, duration of symptoms prior to presentation, endoscopic scoring, and mucosal biopsies. Clinical evaluation was performed at two-week intervals for six weeks, with repeat biopsies taken at six weeks. There was no significant difference with respect to age, male/female ratio, past history of proctosigmoiditis, length of colorectum involved at the time of initial presentation, symptom resolution, and endoscopic and histologic improvement among the three treatment groups. Recovery occurred in a similar proportion in each of the three groups: CS, 10/12; 5-ASA, 17/19; and SCFA, 12/14. The cost of six weeks of treatment was: CS, $71.82; 5-ASA, $347.28; and SCFA, $31.50. This study indicates that SCFA enemas are equally efficacious to CS or 5-ASA enemas for the treatment of proctosigmoiditis at a significant cost savings.

Randomised controlled trial of short bursts of a potent topical corticosteroid versus prolonged use of a mild preparation for children with mild or moderate atopic eczema.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a three day burst of a potent corticosteroid is more effective than a mild preparation used for seven days in children with mild or moderate atopic eczema. DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, parallel group study of 18 weeks' duration. SETTING: 13 general practices and a teaching hospital in the Nottingham area. PARTICIPANTS: 174 children with mild or moderate atopic eczema recruited from general practices and 33 from a hospital outpatient clinic. INTERVENTIONS: 0.1% betamethasone valerate applied for three days followed by the base ointment for four days versus 1% hydrocortisone applied for seven days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were total number of scratch-free days and number of relapses. Secondary outcomes were median duration of relapses, number of undisturbed nights, disease severity (six area, six sign atopic dermatitis severity scale), scores on two quality of life measures (children's life quality index and dermatitis family impact questionnaire), and number of patients in whom treatment failed in each arm. RESULTS: No differences were found between the two groups. This was consistent for all outcomes. The median number of scratch-free days was 118.0 for the mild group and 117.5 for the potent group (difference 0.5, 95% confidence interval -2.0 to 4.0, P=0.53). The median number of relapses for both groups was 1.0. Both groups showed clinically important improvements in disease severity and quality of life compared with baseline. CONCLUSION: A short burst of a potent topical corticosteroid is just as effective as prolonged use of a milder preparation for controlling mild or moderate atopic eczema in children.