Implementation of a skilled nursing facility readmission review process.

30-day readmissions for patients at skilled nursing facilities (SNF) are common and preventable. We implemented a readmission review process for patients readmitted from two SNFs, involving an electronic review tool and monthly conferences. The electronic review tool captures information related to preventability and factors contributing to readmission. The study included 128 patients, readmitted within 30 days from 1 October 2015 through 1 May 2017, at a tertiary care academic medical centre in Boston, MA, and two partnering SNFs. There was a discrepancy in preventability rating between SNF and hospital reviewers, with 79.7% of cases rated not preventable by the SNF, and 58.6% by the hospital. There was moderate positive correlation between the hospital's and SNFs' preventability ratings (rs=0.652, p<0.001). In most cases, the SNF reviewers felt that no factors contributed (57.8%), and hospital reviewers felt that issues with end-of-life planning (14.1%) and medical complexity (12.5%) were major factors. Despite the lack of strong correlation between SNF and hospital responses, several cross-continuum quality improvement projects were developed. We found that implementation of a SNF readmission review process employing bidirectional review by SNF and hospital was feasible, and facilitated systems-based improvement in the transition from hospital to postacute care.

The hidden societal cost of antibiotic resistance per antibiotic prescribed in the United States: an exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory antibiotic prescribing contributes to the development of antibiotic resistance and increases societal costs. Here, we estimate the hidden societal cost of antibiotic resistance per antibiotic prescribed in the United States. METHODS: In an exploratory analysis, we used published data to develop point and range estimates for the hidden societal cost of antibiotic resistance (SCAR) attributable to each ambulatory antibiotic prescription in the United States. We developed four estimation methods that focused on the antibiotic-resistance attributable costs of hospitalization, second-line inpatient antibiotic use, second-line outpatient antibiotic use, and antibiotic stewardship, then summed the estimates across all methods. RESULTS: The total SCAR attributable to each ambulatory antibiotic prescription was estimated to be $13 (range: $3-$95). The greatest contributor to the total SCAR was the cost of hospitalization ($9; 69 % of the total SCAR). The costs of second-line inpatient antibiotic use ($1; 8 % of the total SCAR), second-line outpatient antibiotic use ($2; 15 % of the total SCAR) and antibiotic stewardship ($1; 8 %). This apperars to be an error.; of the total SCAR) were modest contributors to the total SCAR. Assuming an average antibiotic cost of $20, the total SCAR attributable to each ambulatory antibiotic prescription would increase antibiotic costs by 65 % (range: 15-475 %) if incorporated into antibiotic costs paid by patients or payers. CONCLUSIONS: Each ambulatory antibiotic prescription is associated with a hidden SCAR that substantially increases the cost of an antibiotic prescription in the United States. This finding raises concerns regarding the magnitude of misalignment between individual and societal antibiotic costs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Decision Support Strategies in Acute Bronchitis.

BACKGROUND: A recent clinical trial suggests that printed (PDS) and computer decision support (CDS) interventions are safe and effective in reducing antibiotic use in acute bronchitis relative to usual care (UC). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of decision support interventions in reducing antibiotic use in acute bronchitis. DESIGN: We conducted a clinical trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing UC, PDS and CDS for management of acute bronchitis. We assumed a societal perspective, 5-year program duration and 30-day time horizon. PATIENTS: The U.S. population aged 13-64 years presenting with acute bronchitis in the ambulatory setting. INTERVENTIONS: Printed and computer decision support interventions relative to usual care. MAIN MEASURES: Cost per antibiotic prescription safely avoided. KEY RESULTS: In the base case, PDS dominated UC and CDS, with lesser total costs (PDS: $2,574, UC: $2,768, CDS: $2,805) and fewer antibiotic prescriptions (PDS: 3.79, UC: 4.60, CDS: 3.95) per patient over 5 years. In one-way sensitivity analyses, PDS dominated UC across all parameter values, except when antibiotics reduced work loss by ≥ 1.9 days or the probability of hospitalization within 30 days was ≥ 0.9 % in PDS (base case: 0.2 %) or ≤ 0.4 % in UC (base case: 1.0 %). The dominance of PDS over CDS was sensitive both to probability of hospitalization and plausible variation in the adjusted odds of antibiotic use in both strategies. CONCLUSIONS: A PDS strategy to reduce antibiotic use in acute bronchitis is less costly and more effective than both UC and CDS strategies, although results were sensitive to variation in probability of hospitalization and the adjusted odds of antibiotic use. This simple, low-cost, safe, and effective intervention would be an economically reasonable component of a multi-component approach to address antibiotic overuse in acute bronchitis.

Cost-effectiveness of programs to eliminate disparities in elderly vaccination rates in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There are disparities in influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates among elderly minority groups and little guidance as to which intervention or combination of interventions to eliminate these disparities is likely to be most cost-effective. Here, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four hypothetical vaccination programs designed to eliminate disparities in elderly vaccination rates and differing in the number of interventions. METHODS: We developed a Markov model in which we assumed a healthcare system perspective, 10-year vaccination program and lifetime time horizon. The cohort was the combined African-American and Hispanic 65 year-old birth cohort in the United States in 2009. We evaluated five different vaccination strategies: no vaccination program and four vaccination programs that varied from "low intensity" to "very high intensity" based on the number of interventions deployed in each program, their cumulative cost and their cumulative impact on elderly minority influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates. RESULTS: The very high intensity vaccination program ($24,479/quality-adjusted life year; QALY) was preferred at willingness-to-pay-thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000/QALY and prevented 37,178 influenza cases, 342 influenza deaths, 1,158 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases and 174 IPD deaths over the birth cohort's lifetime. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the very high intensity program only became cost-prohibitive (>$100,000/QALY) at less likely values for the influenza vaccination rates achieved in year 10 of the high intensity (>73.5%) or very high intensity (<76.8%) vaccination programs. CONCLUSIONS: A practice-based vaccination program designed to eliminate disparities in elderly minority vaccination rates and including four interventions would be cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy for outpatient management of acute respiratory tract infections in adults.

BACKGROUND: Two clinical trials suggest that procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy can safely reduce antibiotic prescribing in outpatient management of acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) in adults. Yet, it remains unclear whether procalcitonin testing is cost-effective in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy in outpatient management of ARTIs in adults. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness model based on results from two published European clinical trials, with all parameters varied widely in sensitivity analyses. PATIENTS: Two hypothetical cohorts were modeled in separate trial-based analyses: adults with ARTIs judged by their physicians to require antibiotics and all adults with ARTIs. INTERVENTIONS: Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy protocols versus usual care. MAIN MEASURES: Costs and cost per antibiotic prescription safely avoided. KEY RESULTS: We estimated the health care system willingness-to-pay threshold as $43 (range $0­$333) per antibiotic safely avoided, reflecting the estimated cost of antibiotic resistance per outpatient antibiotic prescribed. In the cohort including all adult ARTIs judged to require antibiotics by their physicians, procalcitonin cost $31 per antibiotic prescription safely avoided and the likelihood of procalcitonin use being favored compared to usual care was 58.4 % in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. In the analysis that included all adult ARTIs, procalcitonin cost $149 per antibiotic prescription safely avoided and the likelihood of procalcitonin use being favored was 2.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy for outpatient management of ARTIs in adults would be cost-effective when the costs of antibiotic resistance are considered and procalcitonin testing is limited to adults with ARTIs judged by their physicians to require antibiotics.

Cost-effectiveness of a program to eliminate disparities in pneumococcal vaccination rates in elderly minority populations: an exploratory analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Invasive pneumococcal disease is a major cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States, particularly among the elderly (>65 years). There are large racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination rates in this population. Here, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical national vaccination intervention program designed to eliminate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination in the elderly. METHODS: In an exploratory analysis, a Markov decision-analysis model was developed, taking a societal perspective and assuming a 1-year cycle length, 10-year vaccination program duration, and lifetime time horizon. In the base-case analysis, it was conservatively assumed that vaccination program promotion costs were $10 per targeted minority elder per year, regardless of prior vaccination status and resulted in the elderly African American and Hispanic pneumococcal vaccination rate matching the elderly Caucasian vaccination rate (65%) in year 10 of the program. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness of the vaccination program relative to no program was $45,161 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in the base-case analysis. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the likelihood of the vaccination program being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained was 64% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a conservative analysis biased against the vaccination program, a national vaccination intervention program to ameliorate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination would be cost-effective.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of a national program to eliminate disparities in influenza vaccination rates among elderly minority groups.

Influenza is a major cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States, particularly among the elderly. Yet, there remain large disparities in influenza vaccination rates across elderly Caucasian (70%), African-American (50%) and Hispanic (55%) populations, with substantial mortality consequences. In this study, we built a decision-analysis model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical national vaccination program designed to eliminate these disparities in influenza vaccination rates. Taking a societal perspective, we developed a Markov model with a one-year cycle length and lifetime time horizon. In the base case, we conservatively assumed that the cost of promoting the vaccination program was $10 per targeted elder per year and that by year 10, the vaccination rate of the elderly African-American and Hispanic populations would equal the vaccination rate of the elderly Caucasian population (70%). The cost-effectiveness of the vaccination program compared to no vaccination program was $48,617 per QALY saved. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY saved, the likelihood of the vaccination program being cost-effective was 38% and 92%, respectively. In an analysis using conservative assumptions, we found that a hypothetical program to ameliorate disparities in influenza vaccination rates has a moderate to high likelihood of being cost-effective.