Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
J Comp Eff Res ; 9(1): 67-77, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31773992

RESUMEN

Aim: To estimate direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a self-insured employer's perspective. Methods: Employer-sponsored insurance claims data were analyzed to estimate costs owing to absence and short-term disability 1 year following global endometrial ablation (GEA), outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH). Results: Costs for women who had GEA are substantially less than costs for women who had either OPH or IPH, with the difference ranging from approximately $7700 to approximately $10,000 for direct costs and approximately $4200 to approximately $4600 for indirect costs. Women who had GEA missed 21.8-24.0 fewer works days. Conclusion: Study results suggest lower healthcare costs associated with GEA versus OPH or IPH from a self-insured employer perspective.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ginecológicos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ginecológicos/métodos , Planes de Asistencia Médica para Empleados/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemorragia Uterina/cirugía , Adulto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/estadística & datos numéricos , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial/economía , Femenino , Planes de Asistencia Médica para Empleados/organización & administración , Servicios de Salud/economía , Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Histerectomía/economía , Pacientes Internos/estadística & datos numéricos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Seguro por Discapacidad/economía , Seguro por Discapacidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores Socioeconómicos
2.
Am J Prev Med ; 57(3): 394-402, 2019 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31377088

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Despite healthcare reforms mandating expanded insurance coverage and reduced out-of-pocket costs for preventive care, cancer screening rates remain relatively static. No study has measured cancer screening rates for multiple tests among non-Medicare patients. METHODS: This retrospective, population-based claims analysis, conducted in 2016-2017, of commercially insured and Medicaid-insured women aged 30-59 years enrolled in IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicaid Databases (containing approximately 90 and 17 million enrollees, respectively) during 2010-2015 describes screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer. Key outcomes were (1) proportion screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer among the age-eligible population compared with accepted age-based recommendations and (2) proportion with longer-than-recommended intervals between tests. RESULTS: One half (54.7%) of commercially insured women aged 40-59 years (n=1,538,444) were screened three or more times during the 6-year study period for breast cancer; for Medicaid-insured women (n=78,897), the rates were lower (23.7%). One third (43.4%) of commercially insured and two thirds (68.9%) of Medicaid-insured women had a >2.5-year gap between mammograms. Among women aged 30-59 years, 59.3% of commercially insured women and 31.4% of Medicaid-insured women received two or more Pap tests. The proportion of patients with a >3.5-year gap between Pap tests was 33.9% (commercially insured) and 57.1% (Medicaid-insured). Among women aged 50-59 years, 63.3% of commercially insured women and 47.2% of Medicaid-insured women were screened at least one time for colorectal cancer. Almost all women aged 30-59 years (commercially insured, 99.1%; Medicaid-insured, 98.9%) had at least one healthcare encounter. CONCLUSIONS: Breast and cervical cancer screenings remain underutilized among both commercially insured and Medicaid-insured populations, with lower rates among the Medicaid-insured population. However, almost all women had at least one healthcare encounter, suggesting opportunities for better coordinated care.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Neoplasias Colorrectales/prevención & control , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/prevención & control , Adulto , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/economía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/economía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Planes de Seguro con Fines de Lucro/economía , Planes de Seguro con Fines de Lucro/legislación & jurisprudencia , Planes de Seguro con Fines de Lucro/normas , Planes de Seguro con Fines de Lucro/estadística & datos numéricos , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/normas , Medicaid/economía , Medicaid/legislación & jurisprudencia , Medicaid/normas , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/economía , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act/legislación & jurisprudencia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/economía
3.
Acad Radiol ; 26(5): 597-605, 2019 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30057195

RESUMEN

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes associated with breast cancer screening with digital mammography (DM) alone versus in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in a large representative cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 325,729 screening mammograms from 247,431 women were analyzed, across two healthcare systems, from June 2015 to September 2017. Patient level demographic, calculated risk levels, and clinical outcomes were extracted from radiology information system and electronic medical records. Multivariable regression modeling adjusting for institution, age, breast density, and first exam was conducted to compare patient characteristics, recall rates, time to biopsy and final diagnosis, clinical outcomes, and diagnostic performance. Participating institutions and the Coordinating Center received Institutional Review Board approval for a waiver of consent to collect and link data and perform analysis. RESULTS: A total of 194,437 (59.7%) screens were DBT versus 131,292 (40.3%) with DM. Women with dense breasts and higher calculated risk were more likely to be screened with DBT. Recall rates were lower for DBT overall (8.83% DBT vs 10.98% DM, adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 0.83-0.87) and across all age groups, races, and breast densities, and at facilities that used predominantly DBT (8.05%) versus predominantly DM (11.22%), or a combination (10.73%). The most common diagnostic pathway after recall was mammography and ultrasound. Women recalled from DBT were more likely to proceed directly to ultrasound. The median time to biopsy (18 vs 22 days) and final diagnosis (10 vs 13 days) was shorter for DBT. The adjusted cancer rate, cancer detection rate, and specificity were higher for DBT. CONCLUSION: DBT demonstrated a more efficient screening pathway and improved quality measures with lower recall rates in all patient types, reduced diagnostic mammography and shorter time to biopsy and final diagnosis.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Biopsia/estadística & datos numéricos , Densidad de la Mama/fisiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios , Femenino , Humanos , Aprendizaje del Sistema de Salud , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
4.
Popul Health Manag ; 21(S1): S13-S20, 2018 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29649369

RESUMEN

The primary objective of this study was to describe surgical treatment patterns among women with newly diagnosed uterine fibroids (UF). A secondary objective was to estimate the medical costs associated with other common surgical interventions for UF. Claims-based commercial and Medicare data (2011-2016) were used to identify women aged ≥30 years with continuous enrollment for at least 12 months before and after a new diagnosis of UF. Receipt of a surgical or radiologic procedure (hysterectomy, myomectomy, endometrial ablation, uterine artery embolization, and curettage) was the primary outcome. Health care resource utilization and costs were calculated for women with at least 12 months of continuous enrollment following a UF surgical procedure. Among women who met selection criteria, 31.7% of patients underwent a surgical procedure; 20.9% of these underwent hysterectomy. An increase was observed over time in the percentage of women undergoing outpatient hysterectomy (from 27.0% to 40.2%) and hysteroscopic myomectomy (from 8.0% to 11.5%). The cost analysis revealed that total health care costs for hysteroscopic myomectomy ($17,324) were significantly lower (P < 0.001) than those for women who underwent inpatient hysterectomy ($24,027) and those for women undergoing the 3 comparison procedures. Hysterectomy was the most common surgical intervention. Patients undergoing inpatient hysterectomy had the highest health care costs. Although less expensive, minimally invasive approaches are becoming more common; they are performed infrequently in patients with newly diagnosed UF. The results of this study may be useful in guiding decisions regarding the most appropriate and cost-effective surgical treatment for UF.


Asunto(s)
Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Leiomioma , Adulto , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial/economía , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Histerectomía/economía , Histerectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Leiomioma/economía , Leiomioma/epidemiología , Leiomioma/cirugía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Embolización de la Arteria Uterina/economía , Embolización de la Arteria Uterina/estadística & datos numéricos
5.
Popul Health Manag ; 21(S1): S1-S12, 2018 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29570003

RESUMEN

Every year, abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) exacts a heavy toll on women's health and leads to high costs for the US health care system. The literature shows that endometrial ablation results in fewer complications, shorter recovery and lower costs than more commonly performed hysterectomy procedures. The objective of this study was to model clinical-economic outcomes, budget impact, and cost-effectiveness of global endometrial ablation (GEA) versus outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH) procedures. A decision tree, state-transition (semi-Markov) economic model was developed to simulate 3 hypothetical cohorts of women who received surgical treatment for AUB (GEA, OPH, and IPH) over 1, 2, and 3 years to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes for GEA vs. OPH and GEA vs. IPH. Two versions of the model were created to reflect both commercial health care payer and US Medicaid perspectives, and analyses were conducted for both payer types. Total health care costs in the first year after GEA were substantially lower compared with those for IPH and OPH. Budget impact analysis results showed that increasing GEA utilization yields total annual cost savings of about $906,000 for a million-member commercial health plan and about $152,000 in cost savings for a typical-sized state Medicaid plan with 1.4 million members. Cost-effectiveness analysis results for both perspectives showed GEA as economically dominant (conferring greater benefit at lower cost) over both OPH and IPH in the 1-year commercial scenario. This study demonstrates that, for some patients, GEA may prove to be a safe, uterus-sparing, cost-effective alternative to OPH and IPH for the surgical treatment of AUB.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial , Hospitalización , Histerectomía , Hemorragia Uterina , Adulto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/estadística & datos numéricos , Árboles de Decisión , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial/economía , Técnicas de Ablación Endometrial/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/economía , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Histerectomía/economía , Histerectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicaid/economía , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos , Hemorragia Uterina/economía , Hemorragia Uterina/epidemiología , Hemorragia Uterina/cirugía
6.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(4): 467-474.e5, 2017 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28139412

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Better understanding regarding the clinical-economic value of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for breast cancer screening for Medicaid enrollees is needed to help inform sound, value-based decision making. The objective of this study was to conduct a clinical-economic value analysis of DBT for breast cancer screening among women enrolled in Medicaid to assess the potential clinical benefits, associated expenditures, and net budget impact of DBT. METHODS: Two annual screening mammography scenarios were evaluated with an economic model: (1) full-field digital mammography and (2) combined full-field digital mammography and DBT. The model focused on two main drivers of DBT value: (1) capacity for DBT to reduce the number of women recalled for additional follow-up imaging and diagnostic services and (2) capacity of DBT to facilitate earlier diagnosis of cancer at earlier stages, when treatment costs are lower. RESULTS: Model analysis results showed that the use of DBT as a mammographic screening modality by Medicaid enrollees potentially reduces the need for follow-up diagnostic services and improves the detection of invasive cancers, allowing earlier, less costly treatment. With the modest incremental reimbursement of $37 for DBT expected for a typical Medicaid claim, annual cost savings from DBT predicted by the model amounts to $8.14 per patient, potentially translating into more than $12,000 savings per year for an average-sized Medicaid plan and as much as $207,000 savings per year for a typical state Medicaid program. CONCLUSIONS: Wider adoption of DBT presents an opportunity to deliver value-based care to Medicaid programs and to help address disparities and barriers to accessing preventive care by some of the nation's most vulnerable citizens.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mamografía/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Medicaid/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Gastos en Salud , Humanos , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...