Real-world costs of ischemic stroke by discharge status

Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the acute healthcare costs of ischemic stroke during hospitalization and the quarterly all-cause healthcare costs for the first year after discharge by discharge status.

Methods: Adult patients with a hospitalization with a diagnosis of ischemic stroke (ICD-9-CM: 434.xx or 436.xx) between 1 January 2006 and 31 March 2015 were identified from a large US commercial claims database. Patients were classified into three cohorts based on their discharge status from the first stroke hospitalization, i.e. dead at discharge, discharged with disability, or discharged without disability. Third-party (medical and pharmacy) and out-of-pocket costs were adjusted to 2015 USD.

Results: A total of 7919 patients dead at discharge, 45,695 patients discharged with disability, and 153,778 patients discharged without disability were included in this analysis. The overall average age was 59.7 years and 52.3% were male. During hospitalization, mean total costs (third-party and out-of-pocket) were $68,370 for patients dead at discharge, $73,903 for patients discharged with disability, and $24,448 for patients discharged without disability (p?p?p?p?Conclusion: The results demonstrated the high economic burden of ischemic stroke, especially among patients discharged with disability with the highest costs incurred during the inpatient stays.     

One-year costs of ischemic heart disease among patients with acute coronary syndromes: findings from a multi-employer claims database*

ABSTRACT

Objective: Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are life-threatening disorders requiring intensive medical management or invasive cardiovascular procedures. Limited data exist on the costs and resource utilization associated with ACS.

Methods: This retrospective single-cohort study analyzed administrative claims data from employer-sponsored plans for patients with an ACS hospitalization in 2001–2002. A 1?year follow-up period was used, and patients who were under age 35 or had an ACS diagnosis in the 12 months before the hospitalization were excluded. Costs were reported in 2005 US dollars.

Results: We identified 16?321 patients hospitalized for ACS during the study period. Mean (±?SD) age was 55.6 (±?6.7) years, 66.7% were male, and 46.3% underwent a revascularization procedure during their initial hospital­ization. Mean length of stay for the initial hospitalization was 4.6 days (median: 3.0; IQR: 2.0–5.0), and per-patient expenditures averaged $22?921 (median: $13?960; IQR: $6839–28?588). During the follow-up period, 21% of patients were rehospitalized for ischemic heart disease (IHD), and the cost of rehospitalization averaged $28?637. Additionally, in the year following the inpatient admission, 50% of patients were prescribed antiplatelet or anti­coagulant medications, and 90% of patients were prescribed lipid-lowering, antihypertensive, or anti­arrhythmic medications. IHD-related expenditures after the initial inpatient stay averaged $9425 (median: $2800; IQR: $899–7577); 61% of these costs were due to rehospitalization. Total first-year costs averaged $32?345 (median: $21?653; IQR: $10?642–41?106).

Limitations: Diagnoses could not be verified through medical charts. Payments for Medicare patients were not assessed given our focus on the working-age population.

Conclusions: In this employer-sponsored health plan population, the costs of inpatient and outpatient IHD-related care were high. Future studies should evaluate the impact of improved patient management on post-discharge costs.     

Cost implications of IV versus oral anti-angiogenesis therapies in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: retrospective claims database analysis*

ABSTRACT

Objective: Angiogenesis inhibitors (AI) are promising novel treatments for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, IV therapy may impose infection risk from IV catheters, and will include increased costs due to administration and transportation costs. This study evaluated the incremental costs associated with IV administration of selected AI therapies (bevacizumab off-label) compared to oral therapies (sunitinib or sorafenib) for the treatment of RCC.

Methods: Patients with ≥2 RCC claims (ICD-9: 189.0, 198.0) were identified from a US commercial health insurance claims database from 1/2004 to 12/2007. Patients receiving bevacizumab (n?=?109) were matched 1:1 to patients receiving sorafenib or sunitinib, and observed from their first AI therapy claim until the last treatment date. AI, inpatient, outpatient and pharmacy costs were calculated on a per-patient per-month (PPPM) basis over the treatment period. Costs were compared between the IV AI group and each separate oral AI group using multivariate Tobit regressions for each category separately, adjusting for demographic and baseline clinical characteristics. This study assessed costs of treatment and did not evaluate the cost-effectiveness of AIs.

Results: Mean total medical costs were $13?351, $6998, and $8213 PPPM for bevacizumab, sorafenib, and sunitinib, respectively (p?<0.05 for equality). Adjusted incremental total cost for the bevacizumab group was $4951 PPPM compared to sorafenib and $4610 PPPM compared to sunitinib (both p?<?0.05). Bevacizumab patients incurred incremental PPPM outpatient services cost compared to sorafenib and sunitinib of $2772 and $2548, respectively (both p?<?0.05).

Conclusions: Assuming median progression-free survival of 8.5 months as shown for bevacizumab (Bukowski, et al., J Clin Oncol 2007), the incremental costs would be estimated at $39?188–42?080 per patient compared to those treated with sunitinib or sorafenib. Assuming similar efficacies, oral AI therapies may result in cost savings to patients and healthcare payers over IV therapies.     

Short-term economic impact associated with occupational needlestick injuries among acute care nurses

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Recent survey data have reported the incidence rate of needlestick injuries (NIs) and NIs which draw blood sustained by nurses caring for patients with diabetes in an in-patient hospital setting. The purpose of this study was to deduce the potential short-term annual economic impact resulting from such NI, and to project the potential national economic burden of NI among this population of health care workers (HCWs).

Methods: Data were obtained from a recently published, IRB-approved, Internet-based survey in which nurses routinely treating patients with diabetes self-reported outcomes of their experience with NI (N = 400). A micro-costing approach was adopted. Direct costs comprised post-exposure testing (PET) for infection, post-exposure health care services utilization, and NI-induced post-exposure prophylactic (PEP) drug utilization. Indirect costs were derived from missed workdays and associated lost productivity. These data were combined with data related to the national epidemiology and total incidence of NIs among HCWs and risk-associated populations to project the national burden.

Results: Among 400 nurses, 110 sustained at least one NI in the past year, with 73 punctures drawing blood. The ensuing total short-term costs of these NIs were calculated to range from $25?896 to $36?066. Indirect costs accounted for 44–62% of this total cost. Average short-term costs per NI ranged from $145 to $201, and average short-term costs of NI per injured nurse ranged from $235 to $328. Assuming mean values from published literature on the incidence and distribution of NI among nursing populations, an annual national burden of $65 million was calculated for costs in the immediate period following NI.

Conclusions: These data suggest substantial economic burden immediately following NI on a national and individual hospital level occurring among acute-care nurses treating patients with diabetes. Long-term treatment costs would add to the overall economic burden.     

The burden of illness associated with psoriasis: cost of treatment with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the US

SUMMARY

Objective: To evaluate utilization and direct healthcare expenditures among psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the United States.

Design: Cohort study using retrospective administrative medical claims.

Patients: Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy, as well as a matched cohort of non-psoriasis patients. All patients were covered by employer-sponsored insurance between 1 April 1996 and 31 December 2000.

Main outcome measures: Estimated risk of hospitalization and total annual healthcare expenditures overall and by comorbidity status were compared for persons with psoriasis using systemic therapy or phototherapy and persons without psoriasis. Annualized utilization rates for hospitalizations, and use of emergency department, outpatient physician, outpatient laboratory, and outpatient pharmaceutical services were also compared across the two cohorts.

Results: Seventeen percent of psoriasis patients were treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Patients with comorbid anemia, carcinoma, diabetes, depression, GI disorders, hepatotoxicity, hypertension, and nephrotoxicity had significantly higher expenditures than non-psoriasis patients with the same comorbidities (?p ≤ 0.05). Elevated risk of hospitalization also contributed to higher expenditures in patients treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Limitations of this study include those inherent in using claims data such as dependence on diagnosis coding, the fact that psoriasis severity cannot be determined directly from claims data, confounding comorbidities, and the fact that only direct healthcare expenditures were considered in this analysis.

Conclusion: Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapies/phototherapies have significantly more comorbidities and higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis patients. Psoriasis patients with selected comorbidities have significantly higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis persons with the same comorbidities.     

Prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States Medicare population

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States (US) Medicare population.

Methods: Patients were selected from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries (01 January 2010–31 December 2014) to estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia. The prevalence for each calendar year was calculated as the number of patients with hyperkalemia divided by the total number of eligible patients per year. To estimate the economic burden of hyperkalemia, patients with hyperkalemia (cases) were matched 1:1 to patients without hyperkalemia (controls) on age group, chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage, dialysis treatment, and heart failure. The incremental 30-day and 1-year resource utilization and costs (2016 USD) associated with hyperkalemia were estimated.

Results: The estimated prevalence of hyperkalemia was 2.6–2.7% in the overall population and 8.9–9.3% among patients with CKD and/or heart failure. Patients with hyperkalemia had higher 1-year rates of inpatient admissions (1.28 vs. 0.44), outpatient visits (30.48 vs. 23.88), emergency department visits (2.01 vs. 1.17), and skilled nursing facility admissions (0.36 vs. 0.11) than the matched controls (all p?<?.001). Patients with hyperkalemia incurred on average $7208 higher 30-day costs ($8894 vs. $1685) and $19,348 higher 1-year costs ($34,362 vs. $15,013) than controls (both p?<?.001). Among patients with CKD and/or heart failure, the 30-day and 1-year total cost differences between cohorts were $7726 ($9906 vs. $2180) and $21,577 ($41,416 vs. $19,839), respectively (both p?<?.001).

Conclusions: Hyperkalemia had an estimated prevalence of 2.6–2.7% in the Medicare population and was associated with markedly high healthcare costs.     

Healthcare costs among patients with hemophilia A treated with factor replacement or bypassing agents

Objective: To assess real-world costs for patients with hemophilia A treated with bypassing agents versus factor VIII (FVIII) replacement.

Methods: Claims data from a large US health insurer during 1 January 2006–30 September 2014 were used for analysis. Treated patients with hemophilia A were identified based on ≥1 medical claim with a diagnosis code for hemophilia A (ICD-9-CM 286.0) and ≥1 medical or pharmacy claim for bypassing therapy and/or FVIII replacement during 1 January 2007–31 August 2014. The bypassing therapy cohort comprised patients with ≥1 claim for bypassing therapy; all others were assigned to the factor replacement therapy cohort. Post-index hemophilia-related costs were computed as combined health plan plus patient paid amounts for medical claims with hemophilia A diagnosis code or hemophilia therapy procedure code (bypassing therapy, FVIII replacement therapy, desmopressin, antifibrinolytic therapy), as well as pharmacy claims for hemophilia therapy.

Results: The study sample represented 580 patients: 50 (8.6%) in the bypassing therapy cohort (mean age: 38.5?years; mean post-index period: 2.1?years) and 530 (91.4%) in the factor replacement therapy cohort (mean age: 29.3?years; mean post-index period: 2.7?years). Compared with the factor replacement therapy cohort, mean per-patient-per-month hemophilia-related total costs were 4.8-fold higher in the bypassing therapy cohort ($57,232 vs. $11,899), comprising 4.4-fold higher medical costs ($45,911 vs. $10,352) and 7.3-fold higher outpatient pharmacy costs ($11,321 vs. $1547).

Conclusions: Patients with hemophilia A treated with bypassing agents between 2007 and 2014 incurred substantially higher monthly hemophilia-related medical and pharmacy costs than patients treated only with FVIII replacement.     

Impact of comorbid depression or anxiety on patterns of treatment and economic outcomes among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain

ABSTRACT

Objective: The objective of this retrospective analysis was to assess the correlation of comorbid depression and/or anxiety to patterns of treatment, healthcare utilization, and associated costs among diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) patients, employing a large US administrative claims database.

Research design and methods: Patients under age 65 with commercial insurance and patients aged 65 and older with employer-sponsored Medicare supplemental insurance were selected for the study if they had at least one diagnosis of DPNP in 2005. The first observed DPNP claim was considered the ‘index date.’ All individuals had a 12-month pre-index and 12-month follow-up period. For both populations, two subgroups were constructed for individuals with depression and/or anxiety (DPNP-DA cohort) or without these disorders (DPNP-only cohort). Patients’ demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and medication use were compared over the pre-index period. Healthcare expenditures and resource utilization were measured for the post-index period. Two-part models were used to examine the impact of comorbid depression and/or anxiety on healthcare utilization and costs, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics.

Results: The study identified 11?854 DPNP-only and 1512 DPNP-DA patients in the Medicare supplemental cohort, and 11?685 and 2728 in the commercially insured cohort. Compared to DPNP-only patients over the follow-up period, a significantly higher percentage of DPNP-DA patients were dispensed pain and DPNP-related medication. All components of healthcare utilization, except home healthcare visits and physician office visits, were more likely to be provided to DPNP-DA patients versus the DPNP-only cohort (all p?<?0.01). Controlling for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, DPNP-DA patients had significantly higher total costs than those of DPNP-only patients for Medicare ($9134, p?<?0.01) and commercially insured patients ($11?085, p?<?0.01).

Limitations: Due to the use of a retrospective administrative claims database, limitations of this study include the potential for selection bias between study cohorts, mis-identification of DPNP and/or depression, and inability to assess indirect costs as well as use and cost of over-the-counter medications.

Conclusions: These findings indicate that the healthcare costs were significantly higher for DPNP patients comorbid with depression and/or anxiety relative to those without such disorders.