New perspectives on overactive bladder: quality of life impact, medication persistency, and treatment costs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to C Daniel Mullins.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is one of the most frequently diagnosed chronic medical conditions in the United States and imposes a substantial financial and social burden on Americans. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the cost of health care resources for hypertensive patients taking analgesics stratified by having controlled versus uncontrolled hypertension. METHODS: This was a retrospective, database analysis of data for managed-care patients in Maryland and Washington, DC, recorded from February 1, 1999, to July 31, 2001. Hypertensive patients who were taking analgesics were stratified by their hypertension control status using a claims-based algorithm. Annualized costs and differences in annualized costs calculated for the periods before and after the initiation of analgesics were compared by patient hypertension control status. RESULTS: Of the 9805 patients in the study (mean [SD] age, 49.8 [12.04] years), 2523 (25.73%) were categorized as having uncontrolled hypertension. The mean total annualized costs differed significantly between the controlled and uncontrolled hypertension groups by 2568 dollars (P < 0.001). The annualized costs for emergency-department visits and hospitalizations for uncontrolled hypertensive patients exceeded those for controlled hypertensive patients by 9.3% and 28.0%, respectively. The differences between the postindex- and preindex-period costs for health care resources were 1972 dollars with controlled hypertension and 2961 dollars with uncontrolled hypertension (P < 0.001). The results of linear regression, after adjustments were made for preindex costs and other covariates, indicated that patients with uncontrolled hypertension had significantly increased billed annualized costs (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the costs of health care resources were significantly higher for analgesic users with uncontrolled hypertension than for analgesic users with controlled hypertension. A considerable proportion of the cost differential was directly attributable to hypertension-related treatment care.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This study evaluated the economic impact of a policy change in adult Maryland Medicaid dental benefits that eliminated reimbursements to dentists. We examined all claims for 2 years before and after the change. Reimbursements to dentists fell to zero from their preenactment period annual rate of US 7.6 million dollars; other care settings simultaneously generated an additional US 232,470 dollars savings during the postenactment period. Medicaid's goal to reduce costs was achieved; however, disadvantaged patients may have been confused by the policy change and likely suffered poorer health outcomes and paid for treatment out of pocket, found free clinics, or received free care from generous dentists.
BACKGROUND: Projecting future breast cancer treatment expenditure is critical for budgeting purposes, medical decision making and the allocation of resources in order to maximise the overall impact on health-related outcomes of care. Currently, both longitudinal and cross-sectional methodologies are used to project the economic burden of cancer. This pilot study examined the differences in estimates that were obtained using these two methods, focusing on Maryland, US Medicaid reimbursement data for chemotherapy and prescription drugs for the years 1999-2000. METHODS: Two different methodologies for projecting life cycles of cancer expenditure were considered. The first examined expenditure according to chronological time (calendar quarter) for all cancer patients in the database in a given quarter. The second examined only the most recent quarter and constructed a hypothetical expenditure life cycle by taking into consideration the number of quarters since the respective patient had her first claim. RESULTS: We found different average expenditures using the same data and over the same time period. The longitudinal measurement had less extreme peaks and troughs, and yielded average expenditure in the final period that was 60% higher than that produced using the cross-sectional analysis; however, the longitudinal analysis had intermediate periods with significantly lower estimated expenditure than the cross-sectional data. CONCLUSIONS: These disparate results signify that each of the methods has merit. The longitudinal method tracks changes over time while the cross-sectional approach reflects more recent data, e.g. current practice patterns. Thus, this study reiterates the importance of considering the methodology when projecting future cancer expenditure.
BACKGROUND: This study identifies and compares the individual cost components of hospital and ambulatory services that manage the care of hypertensive patients in eight countries: the US, the UK, France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Canada and Australia. METHODS: Hypertension-related costs are classified according to four major cardiovascular events: (i) acute myocardial infarction; (ii) congestive heart failure; (iii) stroke; and (iv) renal failure, which was subdivided into renal failure treated by dialysis and renal failure treated by kidney transplantation. To make cross-country costs comparisons, we used the DRG codes used in the US and DRG-like codes from each country. US cost information was obtained from hypertension data available from the literature and health economics researchers. For costs in other countries, we consulted with national health economics experts in each country, used analyses by the Research Triangle Institute, and performed Medline and international literature searches. When available, we obtained information from the countries' public and private nationally representative data sources. For cross-country currency adjustments, all currencies were converted using the Purchasing Power Parities from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, and then converted into inflation-adjusted year 2000 US dollars. RESULTS: There exists considerable variation in hypertension-related costs from multinational clinical studies. This study documents that costs are generally higher in the US than in other countries; however, this is not always true. In particular, costs of treating heart failure in France and the costs of renal failure without transplantation in Germany and the UK are relatively high. DISCUSSION: While analysing multinational hypertensive cost data, this study also addresses the impact of cross-country cost variations on cost analyses. During the last decade, drug-development researchers have drawn extensively upon multinational trials to resolve enrollment problems and drug-registration issues. At the same time, formulary decision-makers are increasingly demanding multinational cost-effectiveness analyses of the clinical differences found between drug-treatment regimens. Since these data are typically not captured by randomised clinical trials, standard cost estimates must be applied to the clinical trials' resource data, although such standardised calculations do not necessarily account for clinical and cost variations between countries. CONCLUSION: This paper serves as an instrument for identifying which national and event cost data are comparable for analysis as well as highlighting specific problem areas for cost data integration. Although the study focuses on hypertension-related costs, its results may provide insight for multinational cost comparisons of other diseases where similar hospitalisation costs may be analysed.
BACKGROUND: Given previous reports of variations in prevalence of cancer in low-income individuals, we sought to determine if disparities in cancer prevalence existed in a similarly-insured Medicaid population. METHODS: Using Maryland Medicaid administrative claims data, prevalence rates of lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers were calculated for Maryland Medicaid recipients who were continuously eligible during the period from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. Chi-squared tests were used to test the differences across subgroups. Cancer prevalence data were age-adjusted using Maryland Medicaid enrollees as the standard population. RESULTS: The care prevalence rates for lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers were 75/10,000, 63/10,000, 92/10,000, and 45/10,000, respectively. These rates were 1.2 to 5.2 times those reported at the national level. Generally, higher cancer prevalence rates in certain racial groups in Maryland Medicaid were consistent with previous studies. Regional differences in cancer prevalence existed for each cancer studied. CONCLUSIONS: Limiting our study sample to a population of uniformly low socioeconomic individuals did not eliminate the disparity in prevalence rates between blacks and whites. Different patterns of racial disparity across regions reported by previous researchers might be due to small area variation in addition to socioeconomic status.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this drug utilization review program were (1) to increase beta-blocker prescribing to fee-for-service post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) Medicaid patients; (2) to improve compliance among patients who were prescribed beta-blockers post-AMI; and (3) to evaluate the economic implications of increased beta-blocker prescribing. STUDY DESIGN: Pre-post nonequivalent group design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The intervention targeted physicians of Pennsylvania Medicaid recipients who had an AMI between November 1, 1998, and November 1, 1999. Educational materials were sent to the physicians of post-AMI patients not receiving beta-blockers. Preintervention and postintervention rates of beta-blocker prescribing in the Medicaid program within 7 and 30 days of discharge after an AMI hospitalization were compared. Similarly, pre- and postintervention compliance rates were compared for AMI patients who were prescribed beta-blockers. Cost savings and number of avoided deaths also were calculated. RESULTS: There was a 5.5%, to 6.9% increase in beta-blocker prescribing after the intervention, depending on the follow-up period. Postintervention AMI patients were 16% more likely to be prescribed a beta-blocker. There was an 8.3% increase in patient compliance with beta-blocker therapy from preintervention to postintervention. In the first 2 years of the intervention, the estimated cost savings to the Pennsylvania Medicaid program ranged from 71,970 dollars to 76,678 dollars, respectively. An estimated 3 deaths were avoided. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention resulted in increased appropriate prescribing and compliance with beta-blockers among post-AMI patients. There also were estimated cost savings to Pennsylvania Medicaid as a result of reduced hospitalization, and fewer deaths.
BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States and a major contributor to healthcare expenditure. There are few studies examining disparities in treatment costs. Studies that do exist are dominated by the cost of hospital care. METHODS: Utilizing Maryland Medicaid administrative claims data, a retrospective cohort, design was employed to examine disparities in ambulatory treatment costs of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer treatment by region, race and gender. We report mean and median results by each demographic category and test for the statistical significance of each. Lorenz curves are plotted and Gini coefficients calculated for each type of cancer. RESULTS: We do not find a consistent trend in ambulatory costs across the three cancers by traditional demographic variables. Lorenz curves indicate highly unequal distributions of costs. Gini coefficients are 0.687 for breast cancer, 0.757 for colorectal cancer and 0.774 for prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: Significant variation in nonhospital-based expenditures exists for breast, colorectal and prostate cancers in a population of homogeneous socioeconomic status and uniform insurance entitlement. Observed individual-level disparities are not consistent across cancers by region, race or gender, but the majority of this low-income population receives very little ambulatory care.
BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease accounts for $17.9 billion annually in direct medical costs in the United States. This study assessed the flow of expenditures from a Medicare perspective for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy compared with living and cadaveric transplantation and continued dialysis. METHODS: This study involved a nonrandomized, retrospective investigation of patients with end-stage renal disease and charges using institutional and physician/supplier charges from the United States Renal Data System. The subjects were classified as laparoscopic living-donor transplant, living-donor transplant, cadaveric transplant, or dialysis patients. The first treatment date was set as the index date, and monthly charges were plotted from 12 months before and up to 48 months after the index date. RESULTS: There were 230,769 dialysis patients and 44,063 transplant patients (181 laparoscopic living-donor, 11,466 living-donor, and 32,416 cadaveric). Monthly institutional charges were similar in the year preceding the index date, but they were higher for transplantation in the month after the index date and lower in subsequent periods. Two-year post-index cumulative charges were as follows: Monthly institutional charges were similar for the living-donor ($191,374) and laparoscopic living-donor ($192,053) transplant patients, followed by the cadaveric transplant ($229,449) and dialysis ($250,348) patients, whereas physician/supplier charges were highest for the laparoscopic living-donor transplant ($104,583) patients, followed by the dialysis ($73,730), cadaveric transplant ($70,369), and living-donor transplant ($65,897) patients. The break-even points for the living-donor, laparoscopic living-donor, and cadaveric transplant patients compared with the dialysis patients were 10, 14, and 18 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic procedure may be a beneficial alternative to the conventional open donor nephrectomy procedure and cadaveric transplantation, and it provides considerable benefits compared with dialysis.
Few studies have examined visits to hospital EDs and subsequent admission for the treatment of nontraumatic dental emergencies. The present study of Medicaid-eligible adults was conducted to gain a better understanding of the magnitude of this problem. Data tapes describing adult Medicaid patients' hospital ED and admission claims were obtained from the Maryland Medicaid Management Information System. The database contained information on all claims made to Maryland Medicaid during the period February 16, 1991, to February 15, 1995. There was a total of 4326 dental-related ED claims, which resulted in 85 hospital admissions. Thus, approximately 2% of dental-related ED visits during the 4-year study period resulted in a hospital admission. The mean total cost for claims associated with hospital admissions was $5793 US dollars, whereas the minimum cost was $949 and the maximum was $43,524 US dollars. Although the frequency of hospital admissions associated with nontraumatic dental emergencies is not great, a hospital admission is among the most extreme consequences of failing to prevent or treat dental problems. Although some hospital admissions related to dental problems could be unavoidable, further studies are needed to better understand mechanisms for reducing the use of EDs for care best provided in community-based dental offices.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Combined mortality rates for pneumonia and influenza suggest that the 2 conditions represent the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. The total cost of pneumonia, including indirect costs, was estimated to be approximately $23 billion per year in 1994. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess variables that may be significantly associated with the cost of treating patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We also assessed the impact of treatment guidelines for management of CAP (developed by managed care plans) on total costs. METHODS: Patients in 3 managed care plans who were hospitalized with a primary or secondary diagnosis of CAP in Maryland and Washington, DC, between January 1, 1997, and April 30, 1997, or between January 1, 1998, and April 30, 1998, were identified based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Clinical data were abstracted from patients' medical charts by nurses, and billing data were acquired from these plans. A retrospective data analysis was carried out using billing data from 3 managed care plans and clinical data from hospitals associated with the plans. A multivariate regression model was developed using the natural logarithm of cost as the dependent variable. Independent variables that were studied included severity of illness, days in the intensive care unit (ICU), triage per guidelines, drug therapy per guidelines, mortality, and managed care plan identifiers. RESULTS: The charts of 569 patients were assessed. The mean age of the study sample was 75.3 years. ICU days (P < 0.001), mortality, and drug therapy (both P < 0.01) per guidelines significantly affected costs. As expected, an increase in the number of ICU days led to an increase in costs. However, patients who received drug therapy recommended by the guidelines had significantly lower costs than patients not treated according to the guidelines (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that guidelines for CAP management, such as those developed by managed care plans, may help reduce costs by minimizing unnecessary ICU admissions and appropriately managing patients with CAP.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: The growing shortage of organs available for transplantation has resulted in an increased use of living donors for kidney transplantation. The laparoscopic nephrectomy is a new procedure used to remove kidneys from donors. The study objective was to explore the attitudes of recipients and donors toward living donor kidney transplantation and the impact of the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on donors' and recipients' acceptance of living donor kidney transplantation. METHODS: Tailored self-administered questionnaires were mailed to kidney donors, potential donors, recipients and potential recipients who visited the University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Transplantation between January 1998 and May 2001. RESULTS: The laparoscopic donor nephrectomy helped recipients and potential recipients with their decision to accept a kidney from a living donor (recipients: 53% strongly agreed, 36% agreed; potential recipients: 42% strongly agreed, 46% agreed). To a lesser extent, the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy assisted donors and potential donors with their decision to donate (donors: 19% strongly agreed, 20% agreed; potential donors: 20% strongly agreed, 20% agreed). Potential recipients and recipients identified 2 barriers to accepting living donor kidney transplantation: they were unwilling to accept a kidney if it meant this would financially burden their donors, and they worried that their donors might succumb to a future kidney problem. CONCLUSION: Overall, the study found a positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. This new surgical procedure seemed to positively influence recipients and potential recipients to accept a kidney. In contrast, it had less impact on donors' and potential donors' willingness to give their kidney.