Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Scott D Ramsey

Publications and source records attributed to Scott D Ramsey.

17 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Cost effectiveness of lung-volume-reduction surgery for patients with severe emphysema.

BACKGROUND: The National Emphysema Treatment Trial, a randomized clinical trial comparing lung-volume-reduction surgery with medical therapy for severe emphysema, included a prospective economic analysis. METHODS: After pulmonary rehabilitation, 1218 patients at 17 medical centers were randomly assigned to lung-volume-reduction surgery or continued medical treatment. Costs for the use of medical care, medications, transportation, and time spent receiving treatment were derived from Medicare claims and data from the trial. Cost effectiveness was calculated over the duration of the trial and was estimated for 10 years of follow-up with the use of modeling based on observed trends in survival, cost, and quality of life. RESULTS: Interim analyses identified a group of patients with excess mortality and little chance of improved functional status after surgery. When these patients were excluded, the cost-effectiveness ratio for lung-volume-reduction surgery as compared with medical therapy was 190,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 3 years and 53,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 10 years. Subgroup analyses identified patients with predominantly upper-lobe emphysema and low exercise capacity after pulmonary rehabilitation who had lower mortality and better functional status than patients who received medical therapy. The cost-effectiveness ratio in this subgroup was 98,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 3 years and 21,000 dollars at 10 years. Bootstrap analysis revealed substantial uncertainty for the subgroup and 10-year estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Given its cost and benefits over three years of follow-up, lung-volume-reduction surgery is costly relative to medical therapy. Although the predictions are subject to substantial uncertainty, the procedure may be cost effective if benefits can be maintained over time.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2003

Attitudes towards genetic screening for predisposition to colon cancer among cancer patients, their relatives and members of the community. Results of focus group interviews.

OBJECTIVE: To compare knowledge of and interest in genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer syndromes. METHODS: Colorectal cancer patients, first-degree relatives of colon cancer patients and controls were recruited from a familial cancer registry. Focus groups explored attitudes about genetic testing. RESULTS: All three groups conveyed interest in testing, but lacked knowledge about testing and its implications. After receiving information regarding the potential benefits and costs of testing (including insurance and employment issues) all three groups were disinclined to be tested. The reasons varied among risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: When informed about the costs and implications of testing, individuals may be reluctant to undergo genetic testing, regardless of baseline risk. Barriers to testing will vary depending on the perceived risk of carrying a mutation.

Colorectal Neoplasms↗
PubMed2002

Economic analysis of vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is increasingly important to have timely information about the economic impact of new cancer therapies in today's cost-conscious environment. Nearly 170 000 people are diagnosed with lung cancer annually in the United States. We performed an economic analysis alongside Southwest Oncology Group Trial S9509 to estimate the cost-effectiveness of cisplatin plus vinorelbine versus carboplatin plus paclitaxel for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. There were no statistically significant differences in survival or cancer-related quality of life between the treatment arms. METHODS: Use of both protocol and nonprotocol lung cancer-related health care was tracked for 24 months from the initiation of therapy. To determine expenditures, nationally standardized costs were applied to each type of health care service used, and these were summed over time. Lifetime expenditures and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each arm of the trial were calculated with the use of a multivariate regression technique that accounts for censoring. Student's t tests were used to compare the difference in costs between the arms. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Cancer-related health care costs over the period of observation averaged 40,292 dollars (95% CI = 36,226 dollars to 44,359 dollars) for patients in the cisplatin plus vinorelbine arm versus 48,940 dollars (95% CI = 44,674 dollars to 53,208 dollars) for patients in the carboplatin plus paclitaxel arm (P =.004), with a mean difference of 8648 dollars (95% CI = 2634 dollars to 14,662 dollars). Protocol chemotherapy drugs and medical procedures costs were statistically significantly higher in the paclitaxel arm (P =.0003 and P<.0001, respectively), whereas protocol chemotherapy delivery costs were statistically significantly higher in the vinorelbine arm (P<.0001). There was no difference between the arms in costs for blood products, supportive care medications, nonprotocol-related inpatient or outpatient care, and nonprotocol chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with carboplatin plus paclitaxel is substantially and statistically significantly more expensive than treatment with cisplatin plus vinorelbine. The majority of the cost difference is due to the additional cost of the protocol chemotherapy (approximately 12,000 dollars). Notable differences in costs of downstream health care were not apparent.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

A multifaceted intervention in support of diabetes treatment guidelines: a cont trial.

OBJECTIVE: in an academic family practice clinic, we performed a controlled trial of a multifaceted intervention versus usual care for managing diabetes. Providers received didactic training and computerized compliance feedback to support staged diabetes management, an evidenced-based approach to diabetes care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: one firm of the clinic practice received the intervention, the other served as the control group during a 14-month baseline period and a 14-month study period. HbA1(c) was the principal outcome measure. RESULTS: there was a significant 0.71% difference in change in HbA1(c) values between the intervention and control firms (P=0.02). The subgroup with the greatest improvement in HbA1(c) was those subjects who started the intervention with a HbA1(c) above 8%. The overall improvement in glycemic control could not be explained by differences in visit frequency or the aggressiveness of drug therapy. There were no changes in healthcare utilization or costs between the two firms. CONCLUSION: in an academic family practice clinic, a multifaceted intervention in support of diabetes treatment guidelines modestly improved glycemic control without incurring additional costs. The improvement was mostly due to mitigation of the natural deterioration in control usually seen. Further efforts are required to involve all patients in co-managing their diabetes.

Blood Pressure↗
PubMed2002

Evidence-based management: using serial firm trials to improve diabetes care quality.

BACKGROUND: The design of delivery systems that can truly conduct continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a routine part of clinical care provision remains a vexing problem. The effectiveness of the "computerized firm system" approach to chronic disease CQI was examined, with diabetes as the focus of a 5-year case study. METHODS: A large family medical center had been divided into two parallel group practices for reasons of efficiency. These frontline structures (also known as primary care "firms") were supported to serially adapt and evaluate selected CQI interventions by first introducing process changes on one firm but not the other and comparing the groups. Because all the required longitudinal data were contained in a computerized repository, it was possible to conduct these controlled "firm trials" in a matter of months at low cost. RESULTS: During a 3-year period, implementation of point-of-service reminders and a pharmacist out-reach program increased recommended glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) testing by 50% (p = 0.02) and reduced the number of diabetic patients inadequately controlled by 43% (p < 0.01). Following this outcome improvement, patients exhibited a 16% reduction in ambulatory visit rates (p = 0.04). The observed outcome improvement, however, was reversed during the subsequent 2 years, when staffing austerities forced by unrelated declines in clinic revenue caused the withdrawal of trial interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The processes and outcomes of diabetes care were improved, demonstrating that CQI and controlled trials are not mutually exclusive in moving toward the practice of evidence-based management. Health care systems can, by conducting serial firm trials, become learning organizations. CQI programs of all kinds will likely never flourish, however, until quality improvement and reimbursement mechanisms have become better aligned.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Resource utilization, cost, and health status impacts of coronary stent versus "optimal" percutaneous coronary angioplasty: results from the OPUS-I trial.

In the OPUS-I trial, primary coronary stent implantation reduced 6-month composite incidence of death, myocardial infarction, cardiac surgery, or target vessel revascularization relative to a strategy of initial PTCA with provisional stenting in patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty. The purpose of this research was to compare the economic and health status impacts of each treatment strategy. Resource utilization data were collected for the 479 patients randomized in OPUS-I. Itemized cost estimates were derived from primary hospital charge data gathered in previous multicenter trials evaluating coronary stents, and adjusted to approximate 1997 Medicare-based costs for a cardiac population. Health status at 6 months was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). Initial procedure related costs for patients treated with a primary stent strategy were higher than those treated with optimal PTCA/provisional stent ($5,389 vs $4,339, P < 0.001). Costs of initial hospitalization were also higher for patients in the primary stent group ($9,234 vs $8,434, P < 0.01) chiefly because of the cost differences in the index revascularization. Mean 6-month costs were similar in the two groups; however, there was a slight cost advantage associated with primary stenting. Bootstrap replication of 6-month cost data sustained the economic attractiveness of the primary stent strategy. There were no differences in SAQ scores between treatment groups. In patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty, routine stent implantation improves important clinical outcomes at comparable, or even reduced cost, compared to a strategy of initial balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Lifetime cancer-attributable cost of care for long term survivors of colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine cancer-related medical care costs for long term survivors of colorectal cancer. METHODS: The SEER-Medicare database was used to measure lifetime cancer-attributable costs of care for those with colorectal cancer surviving at least 5 yr versus age- and gender-matched controls. Costs were directly estimated, stratified by age at diagnosis and stage at diagnosis, for years 6-11 after diagnosis and then modeled to estimate lifetime costs. Cost differences between cancer cases and controls were compared to expected costs based on published guidelines for postcancer surveillance. RESULTS: Lifetime medical costs for long term survivors (future years not discounted) were up to $19,516 higher than control costs, and were highest for younger age groups and those with early-stage disease. Excess costs for cancer survivors exceeded expected surveillance costs by $2,223-8,822 for years 6-10 from the date of initial diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-attributable medical costs can be substantial for long term survivors, and exceed expected costs of surveillance. Future research is need to determine the components of excess cost in this survivor group.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2002

Quality of life in long term survivors of colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the quality of life (QOL) for long term survivors of colorectal cancer. METHODS: Persons with colorectal cancer who had survived at least 5 yr from diagnosis were recruited from a local cancer registry to answer questions about general QOL and colon cancer-specific issues. Before the general survey, focus group interviews with long term survivors were conducted to select survey questions from a pool of general and cancer-specific QOL questionnaires. The survey included the Health Utilities Index, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, and questions from the Short Form 36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Cancer. After permission was obtained from their primary physicians, long term survivors from the registry were mailed invitation letters, then telephoned. Those agreeing were mailed self-administered questionnaires with stamped return envelopes. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven respondents (average age = 74 yr, 46% female) completed the survey. Survivors reported a relatively uniform and high QOL, irrespective of stage at diagnosis and time from diagnosis. Non-cancer related comorbid conditions and low income status had more influence on overall QOL than initial stage of colorectal cancer or time since diagnosis. Compared to age-matched populations, long term survivors reported higher overall QOL, but had higher rates of depression. Sixteen percent reported three or more bowel movements a day; 49% reported chronic recurrent diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Those who achieve long term remission from colorectal cancer may experience a relatively high QOL, although physical symptoms such as diarrhea and depressive symptoms remain a problem.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

A guideline for the use of pharmacoeconomic models of diabetes treatment in the US managed-care environment.

BACKGROUND: The Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy has recently created guidelines for the submission of pharmacoeconomic models. Although these guidelines provide a general framework for the integration of pharmacoeconomic models in the drug selection process, a more disease-specific and practical 'hands-on' approach is needed for pharmacy staff and Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committee members. OBJECTIVE: To answer the question, 'How can pharmacoeconomic models comparing treatments for diabetes and its complications be evaluated and used to make more informed formulary decisions?' METHODS: We determined the information needs of a managed care organisation (MCO) making coverage decisions for diabetes therapies and reviewed current guidelines for the submission of pharmacoeconomic models to MCOs. We then developed a set of practical questions for evaluating models of diabetes treatment in a managed-care environment. RESULTS: Information needed by P&T committees in relation to new diabetes medications includes the long-term benefits of reduced micro- and macrovascular complications and changes in drug utilisation patterns, in addition to the immediate drug budget impact. Because diabetes is a complex disease, the peer-review process should be relied on as a first step to help ensure the validity of a model. Then, the end-user of a model should evaluate the sources of data to inform the model,the generalisability of the model for an MCO population, andthe face validity of the assumptions of the model. CONCLUSION: Pharmacoeconomic models in diabetes offer potential for assisting P&T committee members in making more informed decisions. The guidelines presented here provide a practical approach for model assessment. However, additional expertise will be needed by MCOs to appropriately evaluate these models, and joint educational programmes between managed care, academia, and industry should be considered as a mechanism for improving technology assessment in diabetes care.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2002

Measuring costs: administrative claims data, clinical trials, and beyond.

BACKGROUND: Accurate estimation of medical care costs raises a host of issues, both practical and methodological. OBJECTIVES: This article reviews methods for estimating the long-term medical care costs associated with a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: The authors consider data from administrative claims databases and describe the analytic challenges posed by these increasingly common resources. They present a number of statistical methods that are valid under censoring and describe methods for estimating mean costs and controlling for covariates. In addition, the authors compare two different approaches for estimating the cancer-related costs; namely, the portion of the long-term costs that may be attributed to the disease. Examples from economic studies of breast and colorectal cancer are presented. RESULTS: In an analysis of data on colorectal cancer costs from the SEER-Medicare database, the two methods used to estimate expected long-term costs (one model based, one not model-based) yielded similar results. However, in calculating expected cancer-related costs, a method that included future medical costs among controls yielded quite different results from the method that did not include these future costs. CONCLUSIONS: Statistical methods for analyzing long-term medical costs under censoring are available and appropriate in many applications where total or disease-related costs are of interest. Several of these approaches are nonparametric and therefore may be expected to be robust against the non-standard features that are often encountered when analyzing medical cost data.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2002

Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians: clinical and economic outcomes at community-based healthcare facilities.

BACKGROUND: Results of recent studies from high-volume academic centers suggest that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is becoming safer to perform in octogenarians. Similar data from community-based facilities do not exist. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical and economic outcomes of nonemergency CABG in 338 octogenarians at 27 community-based facilities across the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multivariate analyses were used to compare (1) in-hospital mortality rates, (2) rates of discharge to extended-care facilities, (3) lengths of stay, and (4) in-hospital costs between octogenarians and younger patients. RESULTS: Of 338 patients 80 years or older, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher (4.7% vs 2.1%; P = .002), the rate of discharge to extended-care facilities was greater (24.9% vs 4.8%; P < .001), the length of stay was longer (9.6 vs 7.9 days; P < .001), and in-hospital costs were higher ($20,188 vs $18,196; P < .001) compared with patients younger than 80 years. After adjusting for several covariates, we found that octogenarians were at significantly greater risk of experiencing in-hospital deaths (odds ratio, 4.6; P = .001), of being discharged to extended-care facilities (odds ratio, 28.4; P < .001), and of having longer lengths of stay (difference, 0.7 days; P = .002) than were patients aged 50 to 59 years. CONCLUSION: At these 27 community-based facilities, the in-hospital mortality for nonemergency CABG in octogenarians was 4.7%; however, nearly 25% of surviving octogenarians were discharged to extended-care facilities.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Does adherence make a difference? Results from a community-based aquatic exercise program.

BACKGROUND: Evidence exists demonstrating the benefits of exercise for people with osteoarthritis, but little is known about whether exercise programs are effective, that is, whether the benefits of exercise can be seen in "real life" programs for "normal" people under nonlaboratory conditions. OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics of and outcomes for participants who adhere to a community-based aquatic exercise program. METHOD: Two hundred and forty-nine adults with osteoarthritis were recruited from Washington State for randomization to a 20-week Arthritis Foundation aquatic exercise program (n = 125) or a wait-list control group (n = 124). Adherers were defined as those attending at least two classes per week for 16 of 20 weeks. Measures included: Quality of Well Being Scale, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale, and a single arthritis quality of life rating-item. RESULTS: Baseline to postintervention change scores revealed that treatment-group adherers (N = 35) reported improved quality of well-being, physical function, and change in arthritis quality of life compared to controls (N = 124). When comparing treatment-group adherers (N = 35) to treatment-group nonadherers (N = 67), quality of well-being and depressed mood improved for adherers, but not for nonadherers. CONCLUSION: When analyzed for level of participation, exercise benefits adults with osteoarthritis. Consistent participation in exercise programs results in better outcomes. Improved methods are needed to enhance adherence, with increased attention to the role of intrinsic factors such as self-efficacy and belief systems.

Aged↗