scholarly journals 1227. A Survey Study of Healthcare Resource Use, and Direct and Indirect Costs, Among Females with an Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S702-S703
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Thompson ◽  
Alen Marijam ◽  
Fanny S Mitrani-Gold ◽  
Jonathon Wright ◽  
Ashish V Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Indirect Costs ◽  
Direct Costs ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
Direct And Indirect Costs

Abstract Background Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTI) account for a large proportion of primary care antibiotic (AB) prescriptions. This study assessed uUTI-related healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs in US females with a self-reported uUTI. Methods We surveyed US females aged ≥ 18 years who participated in web-based surveys (fielded August 28–September 28, 2020 by Dynata, EMI, Lucid/Federated, and Kantar Profiles). Participants had a self-reported uUTI ≤ 60 days prior, and took ≥ 1 oral AB for their uUTI. Those reporting signs of complicated UTI were excluded. HRU was measured via self-reported primary care provider (PCP), specialist, urgent care, emergency room (ER) visits, and hospitalizations. Direct costs were calculated as sum of self-reported and HRU monetized with Medical Expenditure Panel Survey estimates. Indirect costs were calculated via Work Productivity and Impairment metrics monetized with Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates. Participants were stratified by number of oral ABs prescribed (1/2/3+) and therapy appropriateness (1 AB [1st line/2nd line]/multiple [any line] AB) for most recent uUTI. Multivariable regression modeling was used to compare strata; 1:1 propensity score matching assessed uUTI burden vs matched population (derived from the 2020 National Health and Wellness Survey [NHWS]). Results In total, 375 participants were eligible for this analysis. PCP visits (68.8%) were the most common HRU. Across participants, there were an average of 1.46 PCP, 0.31 obstetrician/gynecologist, 0.41 urgent care and 0.08 ER visits, and 0.01 hospitalizations for most recent uUTI (Table 1). Total mean uUTI-related direct and indirect costs were &1289 and &515, respectively (Table 1). Adjusted mean total direct costs were significantly higher (Table 2) for participants in the ‘2 AB’ cohort vs the ‘1 AB’ cohort (&2090 vs &776, p < 0.0001), and for the ‘multiple AB’ vs ‘1 AB, 1st line’ cohorts (&1642 vs &875, p=0.002). Participants in the uUTI cohort reported worse absenteeism (+15.3%), presenteeism (+46.5%), overall work impairment (+52.4%), and impact on daily activities (+50.7%) vs NHWS cohort (p < 0.0001, Table 3). Table 1. Overall mean uUTI-related healthcare resource use, direct, and indirect cost data Table 2. Estimated uUTI-related direct costs stratified by (A) number of AB and (B) appropriateness of AB therapy used to treat last uUTI Table 3. Mean Work Productivity and Activity Impairment data for uUTI and NHWS cohorts Conclusion Inadequate treatment response, evident by multiple AB use, was associated with an increase in uUTI-related costs, including productivity loss. Disclosures Jeffrey Thompson, PhD, Kantar Health (Employee, Employee of Kantar Health, which received funding from GlaxoSmithKline plc. to conduct this study) Alen Marijam, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder) Fanny S. Mitrani-Gold, MPH, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder) Jonathon Wright, BSc, Kantar Health (Employee, Employee of Kantar Health, which received funding from GlaxoSmithKline plc. to conduct this study) Ashish V. Joshi, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline plc. (Employee, Shareholder)

scholarly journals Direct Costs And Healthcare Resource Use Associated With Advanced Melanoma In Portugal

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. A466
Author(s):  
F Lopes ◽  
MJ Passos ◽  
A Raimundo ◽  
PA Laires
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Direct Costs ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use

scholarly journals Economic analysis of the prevalence and clinical and economic burden of medication error in England

2020 ◽  
pp. bmjqs-2019-010206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Ann Elliott ◽  
Elizabeth Camacho ◽  
Dina Jankovic ◽  
Mark J Sculpher ◽  
Rita Faria
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Medication Errors ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Potentially Clinically Significant

ObjectivesTo provide national estimates of the number and clinical and economic burden of medication errors in the National Health Service (NHS) in England.MethodsWe used UK-based prevalence of medication errors (in prescribing, dispensing, administration and monitoring) in primary care, secondary care and care home settings, and associated healthcare resource use, to estimate annual number and burden of errors to the NHS. Burden (healthcare resource use and deaths) was estimated from harm associated with avoidable adverse drug events (ADEs).ResultsWe estimated that 237 million medication errors occur at some point in the medication process in England annually, 38.4% occurring in primary care; 72% have little/no potential for harm and 66 million are potentially clinically significant. Prescribing in primary care accounts for 34% of all potentially clinically significant errors. Definitely avoidable ADEs are estimated to cost the NHS £98 462 582 per year, consuming 181 626 bed-days, and causing/contributing to 1708 deaths. This comprises primary care ADEs leading to hospital admission (£83.7 million; causing 627 deaths), and secondary care ADEs leading to longer hospital stay (£14.8 million; causing or contributing to 1081 deaths).ConclusionsUbiquitous medicines use in health care leads unsurprisingly to high numbers of medication errors, although most are not clinically important. There is significant uncertainty around estimates due to the assumption that avoidable ADEs correspond to medication errors, data quality, and lack of data around longer-term impacts of errors. Data linkage between errors and patient outcomes is essential to progress understanding in this area.

Assessing the Effect of Injectable or Oral Routes of Treatment Administration on Patient-Reported Outcomes and out-of-Pocket Costs Among Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5931-5931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaloo Gupta ◽  
Safiya Abouzaid ◽  
Ryan Liebert ◽  
Kejal Parikh ◽  
Aaron S Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
The Past ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Out Of Pocket Costs

Abstract Introduction: Healthcare resource use and patient preference play a major role in treatment decisions for multiple myeloma (MM); therefore, it is important to understand the impact of cancer treatment on patient-reported outcomes in a real-world setting. This study aimed to characterize the impact of MM treatments by oral or injectable routes of administration on work productivity, healthcare resource use, and out-of-pocket costs, from the patient perspective. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of 137 US MM patients identified from the Lightspeed GMI global panel and its partners, aged ≥18 years who were currently on a treatment regimen comprised of either oral therapy only (oral users) or on injectable therapy with or without oral medication (injectable users). Patients completed a web based self-administered survey and the study assessed patient's experiences using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire and patient-centric questions related to MM. Patient characteristics, treatment history, healthcare resource use and patient-reported outcomes were summarized and compared between oral and injectable users. Multivariable analyses estimated the association between oral vs. injectable route of administration and outcomes of the WPAI, the number of oncologist/hematologist visits in the past three months, hours spent at appointments related to MM treatment in the past month, feeling upset or frustrated while at the doctor's office (not at all/rarely vs. somewhat often/often/very often; 5 point Likert scale), out-of-pocket costs for oncologist/hematologist visits in the past three months, and financial burden regarding all MM related out-of-pocket expenses (no burden/some burden vs. moderate/high/extremely high burden; 5 point Likert scale). Analyses were adjusted for patient characteristics that differed significantly between oral and injectable users (sex, line of therapy, number of treatments, length of time of current regimen, number of days since last treatment dose, prior radiation treatment, education, BMI, and performance status). Results: A total of 137 respondents participated in the study, of which 43.1% reported currently being on an oral only regimen and 56.9% on an injectable regimen. Patient characteristics were generally similar between treatment cohorts with an average age of 55.7 years (SD=13.7), mean time since diagnosis of 4.3 years (SD=4.3), currently employed (44.5%), having health insurance coverage (97.1%) and mean number of comorbidities (mean=0.3 (SD=0.9), adjusted Charlson comorbidity index). Oral users were less likely to report prior radiation treatment (1.7% vs. 12.8%), and more likely to be on 1st line therapy (64.4% vs. 42.3%, p=0.024) than injectable users. On average oral users reported being on less MM prescriptions in their current regimen than injectable users (1.2 vs. 1.7, p<0.001). In univariate analysis of the WPAI, among the employed sample, oral users reported significantly lower overall work impairment than injectable users (52.4% vs. 68.3%, p=0.049). This was primarily driven by decreased impairment while at work (presenteeism: 46.8% vs. 62.3%, p=0.044) while no difference in absenteeism from work due to impairment (17.9% vs. 21.8%, p=0.446) was found. In multivariable analysis, these differences were no longer significant. After adjusting for patient characteristics, oral users reported fewer oncologist/hematologist visits in the past three months (3.0 vs. 4.7, p=0.027) and lower out-of-pocket costs for all these visits ($130.47 vs $329.49, p=0.025). Oral users were numerically more likely to report no burden/some financial burden regarding all MM related out-of-pocket expenses (45.7% vs. 30.9%, p=0.221), and spend less time spent at appointments related to MM treatments in the past month (5.4 vs. 7.2 hours, p=0.145). Oral users were more likely to report not at all/rarely experiencing frustration while at the doctor's office (80.6% vs. 57.1%, p=0.042). Conclusions: Findings suggest that an all-oral treatment regimen was associated with less healthcare resource use and financial burden than an injectable treatment regimen, and potentially less work productivity loss. However, the latter should be interpreted with caution given the small sample size of employed respondents. These findings should be taken into consideration while making treatment decisions with MM patients. Disclosures Gupta: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kantar Health: Employment. Abouzaid:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Liebert:Kantar Health: Employment; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Parikh:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Research Funding.

scholarly journals The association between psoriasis and health-related quality of life, work productivity, and healthcare resource use in Brazil

2018 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco DiBonaventura ◽  
André Vicente Esteves de Carvalho ◽  
Cacilda da Silva Souza ◽  
Haline Bianca Squiassi ◽  
Cristina Nunes Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Life Work

scholarly journals Use of healthcare REsources and associated COsts in controlled versus uncontrolled carcinoid SYndrome in patients with neuroendocrine tumours: the RECOSY study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Custodio ◽  
P. Jimenez-Fonseca ◽  
A. Carmona-Bayonas ◽  
M. J. Gomez ◽  
M. I. Del Olmo-García ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Carcinoid Syndrome ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumours ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Activity Impairment ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract Purpose To report healthcare resource use and associated costs in controlled versus uncontrolled carcinoid syndrome (CS) in patients with neuroendocrine tumours. Methods A cross-sectional, non-interventional multicentre study was conducted with retrospective data analysis. Resource use was compared between two patient groups: those with controlled CS (> 12 months with no uncontrolled CS episodes) and uncontrolled CS (< 12 months since last uncontrolled episode). Patients were matched for age, sex, and origin and grade of tumour. When no matching patients were available, data from deceased patients were used. Information on healthcare resource use came from review of medical records, patient history and physician reports. Working capacity was assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment General Health questionnaire. Results Twenty-six university hospitals in Spain participated, between July 2017 and April 2018. 137 patients were enrolled; 104 were analysed (2 groups of 52). Patients with uncontrolled CS had 10 times more emergency department (ED) visits (mean 1.0 vs 0.10 visits; P = 0.0167), were more likely to have a hospital admission (40.4% vs 19.2%; P = 0.0116) and had longer hospital stays (mean 7.87 vs 2.10 days; P = 0.0178) than those with controlled CS. This corresponded to higher annual hospitalisation costs (mean €5511.59 vs €1457.22; P = 0.028) and ED costs (€161.25 vs €14.85; P = 0.0236). The mean annual total healthcare costs were 60.0% higher in patients with uncontrolled than controlled CS (P = NS). Conclusion This study quantifies higher health resource use, and higher hospitalisation and ED costs in patients with uncontrolled CS. Better control of CS may result 3in lower medical costs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document