Willingness to Pay for Surgical Treatments for Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Keratinocyte carcinoma (KC) treatment accounts for approximately $5 billion in spending per year, yet no studies have evaluated the US general public's willingness to pay (WTP) for these procedures. OBJECTIVE: To determine the monetary value of surgical KC treatments, as perceived by society, as a measure of preference. PARTICIPANTS, METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed an internet-based age-, sex-, and race-stratified cross-sectional survey of 425 subjects representative of the US general population. Stated WTP and desirability of electrodesiccation and curettage (EDC), excision, and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for facial and extrafacial basal cell carcinoma (BCC) were assessed. A discrete choice experiment was performed using maximum likelihood estimation, and a secondary analysis was performed to determine the influence of framing MMS as the best treatment option. RESULTS: A total of 425 subjects finished their questionnaires, yielding a completion rate of 97%. Median (interquartile range) stated WTP for EDC, excision, and MMS were $1,000 (421-2,079), $1,503 (562-3,062), and $3,006 (1,250-5,084), respectively, when MMS was framed in a standard fashion. Stated WTP for MMS increased to $3,989 (2,015-5,801) when it was framed as the best option. For BCC on the back, WTP for MMS dropped by 12%. CONCLUSION: There is markedly higher societal WTP for MMS on both the face and trunk, regardless of whether MMS is framed as the best option. Gold-standard bias may affect WTP and desirability in medical decision-making under uncertainty, inflating the WTP of options framed as the best while decreasing the desirability of alternatives.

[Cost analysis of Mohs micrographic surgery in high-risk facial basal cell carcinoma]. / Análisis de costes de la cirugía micrográfica de Mohs en el carcinoma basocelular facial de alto riesgo.

INTRODUCTION: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is the treatment of choice for high-risk facial basal cell carcinoma (BCC) as it offers the greatest chance of cure with maximum preservation of healthy tissue. Its use in Spanish public health care hospitals is still limited, however, due to the controversy surrounding its cost. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost of MMS with fresh tissue to treat high-risk facial BCC and compare this to the estimated cost of conventional surgery in a Spanish public hospital. A secondary objective was to identify cost-optimization strategies for MMS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study of a consecutive series of patients with high-risk facial BCC who underwent MMS at the Department of Dermatology at Hospital Costa del Sol in Malaga, Spain between July 2006 and December 2007. We performed a descriptive analysis of the clinical characteristics of the patients and surgical factors. We calculated the total and mean cost of MMS and compared the results to the estimated costs of conventional surgery using patients as their own controls. Differences were analyzed according to tumor site and size, histologic subtype, and recurrence. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients (mean age, 62 years) with 81 high-risk facial BCCs, 97.5% of which were primary tumors, underwent MMS. The most common tumor site was the nose (57%) followed by the orbital region (25%). Histology showed that 64% of the tumors were infiltrative or micronodular carcinomas. Tumor-free margins were achieved in all patients, with no more than 2 stages required in 88% of the cases. The most common surgical reconstruction techniques were direct closure (21%) and closure with a local skin flap or graft (71%); the corresponding estimates for conventional surgery were 2% and 89%, respectively. The total and mean cost of MMS was e106,129.07 and e1325.80, respectively (compared to e97 700 and e1208.70 for conventional surgery). The difference in mean costs between MMS and conventional surgery was not significant (P=0.534). CONCLUSIONS: MMS is a viable, effective technique that does not generate significantly higher costs than conventional surgery in selected patients with high-risk facial BCC. Certain technical and organizational strategies could contribute to optimizing the cost of MMS.

Mohs versus traditional surgical excision for facial and auricular nonmelanoma skin cancer: an analysis of cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare Mohs micrographic surgery and traditional excision in terms of cost and outcomes. DESIGN: We developed a computer-simulation, probabilistic, decision model to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis, with each patient serving as his or her own control. SETTING: University of Connecticut dermatology clinic, a tertiary care referral center. PARTICIPANTS: Input data were derived from results of a consecutive sample of 98 patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer on the face and ears, estimates in the literature on 5-year recurrence rates, and a query of healthy focus-group participants. INTERVENTION: We considered Mohs and traditional excision strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years, cost, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The Mohs strategy was $292 less expensive than the traditional surgical strategy and was more effective by an incremental quality-adjusted life year of 0.056 (translating to approximately 3 weeks of optimal quality of life). Results were robust to subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Mohs may be more cost-effective than traditional excision in eradicating nonmelanoma skin cancer. Further investigation of costs from various geographic payment localities and assessment of quality-of-life outcomes from a population-based sample are needed.

Surgical excision versus Mohs' micrographic surgery for primary and recurrent basal-cell carcinoma of the face: a prospective randomised controlled trial with 5-years' follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Basal-cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer and its incidence is still rising worldwide. Surgery is the most frequently used treatment for BCC, but large randomised controlled trials with 5-year follow-up to compare treatment modalities are rare. We did a prospective randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of surgical excision with Mohs' micrographic surgery (MMS) for the treatment of primary and recurrent facial BCC. METHODS: Between Oct 5, 1999, and Feb 27, 2002, 408 primary BCCs (pBCCs) and 204 recurrent BCCs (rBCCs) in patients from seven hospitals in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to surgical excision or MMS. Randomisation and allocation was done separately for both groups by a computer-generated allocation scheme. Tumours had a follow-up of 5 years. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome was recurrence of carcinoma, diagnosed clinically by visual inspection with histological confirmation. Secondary outcomes were determinants of failure and cost-effectiveness. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN65009900. FINDINGS: Of the 397 pBCCs that were treated, 127 pBCCs in 113 patients were lost to follow-up. Of the 11 recurrences that occurred in patients with pBCC, seven (4.1%) occurred in patients treated with surgical excision and four (2.5%) occurred in patients treated with MMS (log-rank test chi(2) 0.718, p=0.397). Of the 202 rBCCs that were treated, 56 BCCs in 52 patients were lost to follow-up. Two BCCs (2.4%) in two patients treated with MMS recurred, versus ten BCCs (12.1%) in ten patients treated with surgical excision (log-rank test chi(2) 5.958, p=0.015). The difference in the number of recurrences between treatments was not significant for pBCC, but significantly favoured MMS in rBCC. In pBCC, Cox-regression analysis showed no significant effects from risk factors measured in the study. In rBCC, aggressive histological subtype was a significant risk factor for recurrence in the Cox-regression analysis. For pBCC, total treatment costs were euro1248 for MMS and euro990 for surgical excision, whereas for rBCC, treatment costs were euro1284 and euro1043, respectively. Dividing the difference in costs between MMS and surgical excision by their difference in effectiveness leads to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of euro23 454 for pBCC and euro3171 for rBCC. INTERPRETATION: MMS is preferred over surgical excision for the treatment of facial rBCC, on the basis of significantly fewer recurrences after MMS than after surgical excision. However, because there was no significant difference in recurrence of pBCC between treatment groups, treatment with surgical excision is probably sufficient in most cases of pBCC.

Cost comparisons of managing complex facial basal cell carcinoma: Canadian study.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common human malignancy and accounts for over 60,000 new cases of cancer in Canada annually. Although expensive to the health care system, no Canadian studies have reported the costs involved in management. This study calculated the costs of managing high-risk BCCs using radiotherapy (RT) and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). METHODS: Forty-nine consecutive complex BCC cases presenting to a skin cancer referral center were collected prospectively. All were located on the head and neck and were either recurrent disease or located in "at risk" sites such as the eye, ear, lip, or nose. All patients underwent MMS. A radiation oncologist reviewed each case retrospectively. The costs of MMS were the actual costs of the procedure, with an additional amount added to account for the technical costs of the surgery. The costs of RT included physician fees and technical fees. A sensitivity analysis was performed using known recurrence rates from the medical literature. RESULTS: Five patients were excluded from the comparative analysis because radiation was not recommended (age < 50 years or radiation would overlap with a previous radiation field). The direct cost of treating a patient with a single BCC was $871 (range $630-1,159) using MMS and $3,625 (range $3,430-3,971) using RT. The costs were significantly higher for patients with multiple tumors with both modalities (p = .02 for both). The direct costs of a "5-year cure" were $952 (range $644-1,647) for MMS and $3,758 (range $3,564-4,675) for RT. CONCLUSIONS: This study attempted to document the costs associated with two well-recognized and effective methods of treating complex BCC in Ontario. Subgroup analysis revealed independent associations between aggressive histology, larger size, and complexity of surgical closure with higher costs. Although we did notice a trend toward greater costs in patients with recurrent disease, in males, younger patients, and tumors present for > 1 year, these did not reach significance within our sample size. Despite the limitation that treatment costs may be center and provincially dependent, we hope this preliminary report will initiate further study into comparing Canadian costs of managing skin cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of Mohs Micrographic Surgery vs Surgical Excision for Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Face.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) compared with the surgical excision for both primary and recurrent basal cell carcinoma (BCC). DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness study performed alongside a prospective randomized clinical trial in which MMS was compared with surgical excision. SETTING: The study was carried out from 1999 to 2002 at the dermatology outpatient clinic of the University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 408 primary (374 patients) and 204 recurrent (191 patients) cases of facial BCC were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The mean total treatment costs of MMS and surgical excision for both primary and recurrent BCC and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, calculated as the difference in costs between MMS and surgical excision divided by their difference in effectiveness. The resulting ratio is defined as the incremental costs of MMS compared with surgical excision to prevent 1 additional recurrence. RESULTS: Compared with surgical excision, the total treatment costs of MMS are significantly higher (cost difference: primary BCC, 254 euros; 95% confidence interval, 181-324 euros; recurrent BCC, 249 euros; 95% confidence interval, 175-323 euros). For primary BCC, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 29,231 euros, while the ratio for recurrent BCC amounted to 8094 euros. The acceptability curves showed that for these ratios, the probability of MMS being more cost-effective than surgical excision never reached 50%. CONCLUSIONS: At present, it does not seem cost-effective to introduce MMS on a large scale for both primary and recurrent BCC. However, because a 5-year period is normally required to determine definite recurrence rates, it is possible that MMS may become a cost-effective treatment for recurrent BCC.

Cirugía craneofacial: resultados, costo-beneficio y calidad de vida / Craniofacial surgery. Results: cost-efficiency and quality of life

Antecedentes: La cirugía craneofacial tiene por objeto la exéresis completa de todos los tumores que en forma presunta o confirmada invaden la base del cráneo, ya sea por una lesión facial que progrese en sentido craneal o de un tumor encefálico que lo haga caudalmente. Objetivo: Comunicar resultados, costo-beneficio y calidad de vida alcanzada. Lugar de aplicación: Hospital público terciario especializado en el tratamiento de tumores. Diseño: Prospectivo. Población: 42 operaciones en 39 enfermos, 61 por ciento masculinos. La localización fue mayor en seno maxilar y etmoides. La patología fue maligna en el 94,8 por ciento. El 35,9 por ciento era virgen de tratamiento. Método: Cirugía sólo del primario en 90,4 por ciento, extendida a órbita en el 30,9 por ciento y al cuello en el 9,5 por ciento. En el 69 por ciento fueron anteriores y en el resto laterales. En 17 operaciones fue necesario algún procedimiento reconstructivo de partes blandas. Resultados: Se produjeron complicaciones en el 59,5 por ciento. La más frecuente fue la supuración local, seguida de la pérdida de LCR. El 50 por ciento de la muestra tuvo la posibilidad de estar vivo a los 27,5 meses. Los costos alcanzaron una media de $4698. La calidad de vida mejoró en el 55 por ciento. Conclusiones: La cirugía craneofacial es un procedimiento sencillo, económico, seguro y efectivo para tratar estos enfermos (AU)

The physician cost of treating maxillofacial trauma.

Treatment of maxillofacial trauma patients can be difficult for the surgeon because of patient noncompliance, frequent litigation, and poor payment habits. Numerous studies have examined the socioeconomic aspects of trauma as they affect hospitals and communities, but none to date has looked at the socioeconomic aspects of trauma as they affect the surgeon. This study is based on a retrospective sequential review of the medical records of 50 patients who suffered malar complex fractures and were treated with operative reduction at a university medical center. These patients are compared with a sequential series of 20 patients with basal cell carcinoma of the cheek treated by the same surgeon. The maxillofacial trauma group paid an average of 57 percent of their bills and had cases that involved lawyers 30 percent of the time, and only 54 percent of the patients kept all their postoperative appointments. All these figures were statistically different from those of the basal cell carcinoma patients, who paid an average of 90 percent of their bills and had no cases that involved lawyers and 95 percent of whom kept all postoperative appointments. These findings support the premise that maxillofacial trauma patients are difficult patients to treat and that unless the trauma reimbursement system is revised, plastic surgeons may limit their treatment of trauma in the future.