scholarly journals PMS26 - COMPARATIVE TREATMENT COSTS OF SURGICAL VS NON-SURGICAL PATIENTS WITH MEDIAL MENISCUS DEFICIENCY: RESULTS FROM A 24-MONTH SURVEILLANCE STUDY

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S292
Author(s):  
E. Hershman ◽  
J. Jarvis ◽  
T. Mick ◽  
K. Dushaj ◽  
J. Elsner
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-79
Author(s):  
Tor Iversen ◽  
Unto Häkkinen

Previous studies on patients with acute myocardial infarction have found that Finland has higher hospital costs per patient than Norway for the first hospital episode (HEP), while Norway has higher costs   during the first year after the initial admission. In this paper, we analyze the variation in treatment costs between Finland and Norway in detail by introducing novel explanatory variables. We find that the distance from the patient’s home to the hospital increases hospital costs at a declining scale and one-year hospital costs are higher for low-income patients. The higher one-year hospital costs in Norway are accompanied by a comparatively lower mortality rate. While for HEP, the introduction of new explanatory variables does not explain the greater costs in Finland compared with Norway, for one-year costs, the additional variables explain the greater one-year costs in Norway compared to Finland.Published: Online January 2019. In print January 2019.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-437
Author(s):  
Elliott B. Hershman ◽  
John L. Jarvis ◽  
Travis Mick ◽  
Kristina Dushaj ◽  
Jonathan J. Elsner

2021 ◽  
Vol 91 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
Nicholas Coatsworth ◽  
Paul S. Myles ◽  
Graham J. Mann ◽  
Ian A. Cockburn ◽  
Andrew B. Forbes ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles N. Brooks ◽  
James B. Talmage

Abstract Meniscal tears and osteoarthritis (osteoarthrosis, degenerative arthritis, or degenerative joint disease) are two of the most common conditions involving the knee. This article includes definitions of apportionment and causes; presents a case report of initial and recurrent tears of the medial meniscus plus osteoarthritis (OA) in the medial compartment of the knee; and addresses questions regarding apportionment. The authors, experienced impairment raters who are knowledgeable regarding the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), show that, when instructions on impairment rating are incomplete, unclear, or inconsistent, interrater reliability diminishes (different physicians may derive different impairment estimates). Accurate apportionment of impairment is a demanding task that requires detailed knowledge of causation for the conditions in question; the mechanisms of injury or extent of exposures; prior and current symptoms, functional status, physical findings, and clinical study results; and use of the appropriate edition of the AMA Guides. Sometimes the available data are incomplete, requiring the rating physician to make assumptions. However, if those assumptions are reasonable and consistent with the medical literature and facts of the case, if the causation analysis is plausible, and if the examiner follows impairment rating instructions in the AMA Guides (or at least uses a rational and hence defensible method when instructions are suboptimal), the resulting apportionment should be credible.


VASA ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-130
Author(s):  
Klein-Weigel ◽  
Richter ◽  
Arendt ◽  
Gerdsen ◽  
Härtwig ◽  
...  

Background: We surveyed the quality of risk stratification politics and monitored the rate of entries to our company-wide protocol for venous thrombembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in order to identify safety concerns. Patients and methods: Audit in 464 medical and surgical patients to evaluate quality of VTE prophylaxis. Results: Patients were classified as low 146 (31 %), medium 101 (22 %), and high risk cases 217 (47 %). Of these 262 (56.5 %) were treated according to their risk status and in accordance with our protocol, while 9 more patients were treated according to their risk status but off-protocol. Overtreatment was identified in 73 (15.7 %), undertreatment in 120 (25,9 %) of all patients. The rate of incorrect prophylaxis was significantly different between the risk categories, with more patients of the high-risk group receiving inadequate medical prophylaxis (data not shown; p = 0.038). Renal function was analyzed in 392 (84.5 %) patients. In those patients with known renal function 26 (6.6 %) received improper medical prophylaxis. If cases were added in whom prophylaxis was started without previous creatinine control, renal function was not correctly taken into account in 49 (10.6 %) of all patients. Moreover, deterioration of renal function was not excluded within one week in 78 patients (16.8 %) and blood count was not re-checked in 45 (9.7 %) of all patients after one week. There were more overtreatments in surgical (n = 53/278) and more undertreatments in medical patients (n = 54/186) (p = 0.04). Surgeons neglected renal function and blood controls significantly more often than medical doctors (p-values for both < 0.05). Conclusions: We found a low adherence with our protocol and substantial over- and undertreatment in VTE prophylaxis. Besides, we identified disregarding of renal function and safety laboratory examinations as additional safety concerns. To identify safety problems associated with medical VTE prophylaxis and “hot spots” quality management-audits proved to be valuable instruments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document