scholarly journals Direct Medical Cost Analysis of Indian COVID-19 Patients Requiring Critical Care Admission

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 1118-1123
Author(s):  
Shivakumar Iyer ◽  
Kamini N Reddy ◽  
Jignesh Shah ◽  
Monidipa Chowdhury ◽  
Naveen Yerrapalem ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S596
Author(s):  
B. Balkhi ◽  
S. Alqusair ◽  
B. Alotaibi ◽  
A. Alghamdi ◽  
Y. AlRuthia ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Nunik Dewi Kumalasari ◽  
Abdul Rahem ◽  
Bobby Presley ◽  
Eko Setiawan

Long-term treatment of cardiovascular disease may give impact in a high burden of medical cost for the patient. A concern arises whether the health budget allocation prepared by the Indonesian Government through "Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional" program is enough to cover medical cost for the outpatient treatment. This study aims to calculate the direct medical cost of patients with coronary heart disease and heart failure and compare it with the Indonesian Case Base Groups (INA-CBGs) tariff. This is a prospective and observational study carried out in one of the public hospitals in East Java between February and April 2015. All data related to outpatients with coronary heart disease and heart failure were analysed. Direct medical cost analysis in this study calculated from a combination of cost of medication, health professional services, electrocardiography, emergency care services, and laboratory test component, then it was compared with INA-CBGs tariff from ICD 10. Total of 390 patients included were 387 patients with coronary heart disease (99.23%) and three (3) patients with heart failure (0.77%). Average direct medical cost for patients with coronary heart disease and heart failure were IDR 130.593,6 (range IDR 50.282 – IDR 385.911) and IDR 128.587 (range IDR 112.832 – IDR 140.103), respectively. Even though this study showed that budget allocation of INA-CBGs could cover the average direct medical cost of patients with both of diseases, some patients had a direct medical cost higher than the limit of INA-CBGs allocation. Therefore, an optimal interprofessional collaboration between physician and pharmacist needed to provide medical treatment based on patient needs and keep it within budget allocation range.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s407-s407
Author(s):  
Lana Dbeibo ◽  
Joy Williams ◽  
Josh Sadowski ◽  
William Fadel ◽  
Vera Winn ◽  
...  

Background: Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for the diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) detects the presence of the organism; a positive result therefore cannot differentiate between colonization and the pathogenic presence of the bacterium. This may result in overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and risking disruption of microbial flora, which may perpetuate the CDI cycle. Algorithm-based testing offers an advantage over PCR testing as it detects toxin, which allows differentiation between colonization and infection. Although previous studies have demonstrated the clinical utility of this testing algorithm in differentiating infection from colonization, it is unknown whether the test changes CDI treatment decisions. Our facility switched from PCR to an algorithm-based testing method for CDI in June 2018. Objective: In this study, we evaluated whether clinicians’ decisions to treat patients are impacted by a test result that implies colonization (GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ test), and we examined the impact of this decision on patient outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of inpatients with a positive C. diff test between June 2017 and June 2019. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients treated for CDI. We compared this outcome in 3 groups of patients: those with a positive PCR test (June 2017–June 2018), those who had a GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ or a GDH+/Tox+ test result (June 2018–June 2019). Secondary outcomes included toxic megacolon, critical care admission, and mortality in patients with GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ who were treated versus those who were untreated. Results: Of patients with a positive PCR test, 86% were treated with CDI-specific antibiotics, whereas 70.4% with GDH+/Tox+ and 29.25% with GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ result were treated (P < .0001). Mortality was not different between patients with GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ who were treated versus those who were untreated (2.7% vs 3.4%; P = .12), neither was critical care admission within 2 or 7 days of test result (2% vs 1.4%; P = .15) and (4.1% vs 5.4%, P = .39), respectively. There were no cases of toxic megacolon during the study period. Conclusions: The change to an algorithm-based C. difficile testing method had a significant impact on the clinicians’ decisions to treat patients with a positive test, as most patients with a GDH+/Tox−/PCR+ result did not receive treatment. These patients did not suffer more adverse outcomes compared to those who were treated, which has implications for testing practices. It remains to be explored whether clinicians are using clinical criteria to decide whether or not to treat patients with a positive algorithm-based test, as opposed to the more reflexive treatment of patients with a positive PCR test.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


Stroke ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kisha C Coleman ◽  
Paola Palazzo ◽  
Reza B Shahripour ◽  
Amy L Brooks ◽  
Mary A Cronin ◽  
...  

Background: Administration of IV tPA has traditionally necessitated admission to an ICU solely for monitoring, with relatively no need for extensive critical care services. Stroke Units that are capable of monitoring IV tPA patients have been proposed to reduce ICU use, but limited data exist that demonstrate safety. We report the largest series of non-ICU managed tPA cases in relation to safety and discharge outcomes. Methods: Consecutive cases admitted to our intermediate-level Stroke Unit spanning 2009-2011 were assembled. Unit capabilities include IV tPA management with nicardipine infusion for blood pressure control as needed, non-invasive or direct central/arterial line and cardiac monitoring, and BiPAP ventilation. Stroke Unit nurses underwent extensive orientation and participate in NET SMART Junior for continuing education. Overall sICH, and drip/ship sICH (parenchymal hemorrhage in combination with > 4 point increase on the NIHSS), systemic hemorrhage, and tPA related death rates were calculated, along with discharge mRS and total ICU cost savings per day. Results: A total of 302 Stroke Unit admissions for intravenous tPA occurred over the 3 year period, while another 31 (10%) were excluded due to critical care admission for systemic hemodynamic or pulmonary instability. Nicardipine infusions were used in 9 (10.5%) Stroke Unit tPA cases in 2009, 10 (9%) in 2010, and 14 (13%) in 2011. Overall sICH rate was 3.3% (n=10) and systemic hemorrhage rate was 2.9% (n=9) with 5 of these (56%) requiring transfusion. Estimated cost savings in total for this 3 year period was $362,400 for “avoided” ICU days. Conclusions: Intravenous tPA patients may be safely managed on non-ICU Stroke Units when nurses undergo extensive education to ensure clinical competence. Use of the ICU solely for management of tPA monitoring needs may constitute significant overuse of system resources at an expense that is not associated with additional safety benefit.


Author(s):  
Venkateswarlu Konuru ◽  
Kamala Sangam ◽  
Anifa Mohammed ◽  
Swathi Kanneganti

Objective:  Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a major cause of disability, morbidity and mortality Worldwide. The objective of this study is to evaluate the Pharmacoeconomic direct health care cost in type II Diabetes with complications and Diabetes alone: A cost of illness study. Methods:  A Prospective observational study was conducted for one year at the Care diabetes Center; Warangal. The enrolled patients were followed and the information collected contains: total direct costs, which include direct medical costs and direct nonmedical cost. The data observed was analyzed for the average cost incurred in treating the diabetic patient. Results:  The total average costs per diabetic patient without complications was Rs. 8695.7±1341,  this includes the average direct medical cost Rs. 6366.50± 561.12, the average lab cost Rs. 1368.84±64.8, the average direct non Medical Cost was Rs. 960.36±14.04 compared to  those with DM complications,the total average cost was Rs. 12960.73±549.96 for macro vascular complications, Rs. 11039.11±265.36 for micro vascular complications. To treat Diabetes with comorbidities which include both micro and macro complications the total average cost was  Rs. 16658.13±1393.44, the average direct medical cost was Rs. 14071.77±2884.68, the average lab cost Rs. 1628.04±51, the average direct non Medical Cost was Rs.958.32±13.08. The costs were found to increase progressively with the increase in the number of complications. Costs also differed significantly across the types of complications. Conclusion: Our study concludes that the cost of Diabetes with complications resulted about 2 times higher than compared to Diabetes alone.Key words:  Cost analysis; diabetes; economics; health care; direct medical cost; non medical cost


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document