scholarly journals Cost-benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura T Pizzi ◽  
Eric Jutkowitz ◽  
Katherine M Prioli ◽  
Ember (Yiwei) Lu ◽  
Zachary Babcock ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Objectives There is a critical need for effective interventions to support quality of life for persons living with dementia and their caregivers. Growing evidence supports non-pharmacologic programs which provide care management, disease education, skills training, and support. This cost-benefit analysis examined whether the Care of Persons with Dementia in their Environments (COPE) program achieves cost savings when incorporated into Connecticut’s home- and community-based services (HCBS), which are state and Medicaid funded. Research Design and Methods Findings are based on a pragmatic trial where persons living with dementia and their caregiver dyads were randomly assigned to COPE with HCBS, or HCBS alone. Cost measures included those relevant to HCBS decision-makers: intervention delivery, healthcare utilization, caregiver time, formal care, and social services. Data sources included care management records and caregiver report. Results Per-dyad mean cost savings at 12-months were $2,354 for those who received COPE with a mean difference in difference of - $6,667 versus HCBS alone (95% CI: $-15,473, $2,734; NSS). COPE costs would consume 5.6% to 11.3% of Connecticut’s HCBS annual spending limit, and HCBS cost sharing requirements align with participants’ willingness to pay for COPE. Discussion and Implications COPE represents a potentially cost-saving dementia care service that could be financed through existing Connecticut HCBS. HCBS programs represent an important, sustainable payment model for delivering non-pharmacological dementia interventions such as COPE.

2020 ◽  
pp. 107-118
Author(s):  
Michael A. Livermore ◽  
Richard L. Revesz

The core of the Trump administration’s regulatory agenda is to focus on the costs of regulations while ignoring, trivializing, and mischaracterizing their benefits. The administration has made significant regulatory efforts to delay or repeal important initiatives of the Obama administration designed to protect public health and the environment. In some of these proceedings, the Trump administration has altogether ignored the benefits of the rules it seeks to eliminate or suspend, instead focusing solely on cost savings to regulated industry. For example, Trump’s Executive Order 13,771 directs agencies to control costs and eliminate two regulations for every new one. This one-sided approach makes a mockery of cost-benefit analysis. Saving regulatory costs is attractive only if the benefits forgone as a result of these savings are lower than those costs. A rule that reduces compliance costs by giving up an even larger set of social benefits is hardly an attractive proposition.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1697-1697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meera Chappidi ◽  
Y. Natalia Alfonso ◽  
David Bishai ◽  
Sophie Lanzkron

Abstract Introduction The most common reason for acute care utilization for individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) is Vaso-Occlusive crisis (VOC). Patients typically seek out care through the emergency department (ED) At these locations patients often have long waits to get care and often receive sub optimal pain management, which Results in over 40% of patients requiring hospital admission. Johns Hopkins Hospital has implemented a new model of service for people with SCD; an outpatient Sickle Cell Infusion Clinic (SCIC) that was opened in 2008 as an alternative source of urgent care for patients having VOC. The purpose of this study is to determine the net financial benefit of implementing the sickle cell infusion clinic model. Methods A cost-benefit analysis is conducted from the payer’s perspective focusing on direct medical cost (procedures, drugs, tests, etc.) of SCD patients and excludes indirect medical costs (patients’ productive changes). Health care costs and utilization data was available for the last 3 out of 5 years that the SCIC was opened. A literature review was conducted to determine the costs of individual components of the total costs for SCD patients: inpatient hospitalization, ED visit, primary care and secondary care visits, and other healthcare costs for patients with SCD. The overall and average visit cost of the SCIC was determined from the 2012-2013 budget and visits. The billing data for a subset of patients seen in the SCIC that were insured by one of the Medicaid’s MCO was used to determine utilization and costs of healthcare services for 2010, 2011, and 2012. The baseline utilization of healthcare services before the SCIC was implemented was estimated from the literature. As we did not have baseline data we estimated that the 2010 utilization of healthcare services reflected a 20% decrease in hospitalizations and a 40% decrease in ED visits. The overall cost of care for patients with SCD was determined from the above-mentioned sample of billing claims data and utilization estimates. The costs of running the SCIC was added to the overall costs of care. Finally, net savings for the SCIC was determined by calculating the difference in overall cost and savings per beneficiary per month (PBPM). All values are reported in 2012 inflation-adjusted dollars. Results For the subset of patients covered by the Medicaid MCO, the SCIC model resulted in a 7.6% ($676 PBPM) cost savings in the first year (estimated baseline compared to 2010) with savings of 29.2% ($2598 PBPM) when comparing estimated baseline to 2012. The total medical costs for the subset of patients using the SCIC in 2010 was $3,492,339 with an average cost of $94,388 per patient. The SCIC had 1,428 visits by 246 unique patients in FY2012 with an average cost per visit of $434 or $203 PBPM. Other costs in this patient population include: inpatient hospitalization ($3,985 PBPM), ED visits ($326 PBPM), primary and secondary care visits ($26 PBPM), and pharmacy ($493 PBPM). The total cost of care for the same number of sickle cell patients as in our sample who did not utilize the SCIC would have been $3,779,588, with an average cost of $102,151per patient. The SCIC model resulted in cost savings primarily due to a decrease in hospitalizations and ED visits. The number of hospitalization decreased 52.0% (2.88 HPY) and the number of ED visits decreased 48.4% (2.32 visits VPY) in the fifth year of operating the infusion clinic model (2012). The average cost of a hospitalization and an ED visit was $10,797 and $1,024 respectively. These values did not change with the implementation of the SCIC. If we extrapolate the cost savings seen in the subset of patients using the more conservative 7.6% cost savings, to the entire patient cohort this would result in a cost savings of $1.9 million. Discussion Preliminary cost-benefit analysis shows that the SCIC model resulted in significant cost savings that increased significantly in successive years. Cost savings was driven by two major factors: 1) decrease in inpatient hospitalizations and 2) decrease in ED visits. Additional analysis to include actual baseline data is planned along with a sensitivity analysis to identify if there is a certain threshold population density for which this model would be most cost effective. Disclosures: Lanzkron: GlycoMimetics, Inc.: Research Funding.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 283-283
Author(s):  
Mark Christopher Markowski ◽  
Kevin D. Frick ◽  
James R. Eshleman ◽  
Jun Luo ◽  
Emmanuel S. Antonarakis

283 Background: The rising cost of oncology care in the US is an ongoing societal challenge, and identifying biomarkers that inform clinical decisions and reduce the use of ineffective therapies remains elusive. A splice variant of the androgen receptor, AR-V7, was found to confer resistance to Abi and Enza in men with mCRPC, but did not negatively affect responses to taxanes, suggesting that early use of chemotherapy may be a more effective option for AR-V7(+) pts. With the recent development of a CLIA-certified clinical assay for AR-V7 at Johns Hopkins, we hypothesized that AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts may result in cost savings by avoiding futile treatment with Abi/Enza in men with AR-V7(+) disease. Methods: We calculated the cost savings of performing AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts prior to starting Abi/Enza (and avoiding these drugs in AR-V7(+) men) versus treating all mCRPC pts with Abi/Enza (without use of the biomarker). We have set the cost of the AR-V7 assay at $1000. The cost of 3 months of Abi/Enza (the minimum time it would take to determine resistance, clinically) was approximated at $20,000. We estimated that 30,000 mCRPC pts per year are eligible for Abi/Enza in the US. Results: In our prior studies, about 30% of mCRPC pts previously treated with Abi/Enza had detectable AR-V7 in CTCs. Assuming an AR-V7 prevalence of 30%, about 9,000 AR-V7(+) mCRPC pts per year would receive ineffective treatment with Abi/Enza, at an estimated cost of $180 Million. The upfront cost of testing all mCRPC pts who are Abi/Enza-eligible for AR-V7 is $30 Million, resulting in a net cost savings of $150 Million. When performing a continuous cost-benefit analysis after assuming other prevalences of AR-V7 (ranging from 4% to 50%) and a range of costs for Abi/Enza ($2000 to $24,000 per 3 months), we determined that AR-V7 testing would result in a cost savings as long as the prevalence of AR-V7 is > 5% (if the cost of 3 months of Abi/Enza remains at $20,000). Conclusions: AR-V7 testing in mCRPC pts (at $1000/test) is cost-beneficial when considering the current price of Abi/Enza, and may reduce the ineffective use of Abi/Enza leading to a net cost savings to the healthcare system.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 747-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R Langabeer ◽  
Tiffany Champagne-Langabeer ◽  
Diaa Alqusairi ◽  
Junghyun Kim ◽  
Adria Jackson ◽  
...  

Objective There has been very little use of telehealth in pre-hospital emergency medical services (EMS), yet the potential exists for this technology to transform the current delivery model. In this study, we explore the costs and benefits of one large telehealth EMS initiative. Methods Using a case-control study design and both micro- and gross-costing data from the Houston Fire Department EMS electronic patient care record system, we conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) comparing costs with potential savings associated with patients treated through a telehealth-enabled intervention. The intervention consisted of telehealth-based consultation between the 911 patient and an EMS physician, to evaluate and triage the necessity for patient transport to a hospital emergency department (ED). Patients with non-urgent, primary care-related conditions were then scheduled and transported by alternative means to an affiliated primary care clinic. We measured CBA as both total cost savings and cost per ED visit averted, in US Dollars ($USD). Results In total, 5570 patients were treated over the first full 12 months with a telehealth-enabled care model. We found a 6.7% absolute reduction in potentially medically unnecessary ED visits, and a 44-minute reduction in total ambulance back-in-service times. The average cost for a telehealth patient was $167, which was a statistically significantly $103 less than the control group ( p < .0001). The programme produced a $928,000 annual cost savings from the societal perspective, or $2468 cost savings per ED visit averted (benefit). Conclusion Patient care enabled by telehealth in a pre-hospital environment, is a more cost effective alternative compared to the traditional EMS ‘treat and transport to ED’ model.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1073-1076 ◽  
pp. 1362-1367
Author(s):  
Benedetto Manganelli

In the present work the economic feasibility of a project of public infrastructure, the expansion of the subway of the city Potenza, is estimated. The assessment has been developed through the application of the Cost-Benefit Analysis. As is known the advantage of this technique is the ability to express in monetary terms the externalities (positive and negative) generated by the project. In this case, the external cost savings related to the improvement of the mobility in the city have been internalized. The research has shown that the valuation of the externalities can be an effective way to manage the planning of new public transport infrastructure.


1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 259-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vic S Sahai ◽  
Heather Onyett

The objective of this study was to examine critically the validity of a toxoplasma prenatal screening program, in the context of a cost-benefit analysis, as it relates to the Canadian experience. Recently, studies have suggested that early treatment of infected infants with a combination of pyrimethamine and sulfadiazine is effective in reducing the sequelae of toxoplasmosis. It was concluded that a carefully planned screening program for detecting and treating infants infected withToxoplasma gondiiduring pregnancy is cost beneficial. The cost of delivering a screening and treatment program is less than half of what it would cost to provide comprehensive long term medical, educational and other social services for the estimated 1000 children born each year with congenital toxoplasmosis. Even if an incidence as low as two infected infants per 1000 pregnancies is assumed and only 400 children were affected, the screening and preventive therapy program would be justified.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Abushanab ◽  
Amaal Gulied ◽  
Anas Hamad ◽  
Palli Valappila Abdul Rouf ◽  
Moza Al Hail ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Clinical pharmacists play a key role in ensuring the optimum use of cancer medicines. Yet, the economic benefit of this role has never been assessed in Qatar. Aim: To evaluate the overall economic impact of clinical pharmacist interventions in the main cancer care setting in Qatar. Methods: From the public healthcare perspective, this was an analysis of the total economic benefit and a cost-benefit analysis of the clinical pharmacy interventions. As a study sample size, patient records in March 2018, July/August 2018, and January 2019 were retrospectively reviewed at the National Center for Cancer Care & Research (NCCCR), Qatar. The total benefit from interventions was the total of the cost avoidance due to preventable adverse drug events (ADEs) plus the cost savings associated with therapeutic interventions. The interventions cost was based on salary and increased cost due to therapeutic interventions. The cost-benefit analysis results were presented via net benefit and benefit‐to‐cost ratio measures. Results : Total of 1,352 interventions occurred during the 3-month follow-up period. The total benefit was QAR 196,010,360 (USD53,834,206), constituting cost avoidance of QAR 194,764,534 (USD 53,492,040) and cost savings of QAR 1,245,826 (USD 342,166), mostly due to recommending additional medications and the medication dose reduction. The benefit-to-cost ratio was 174:1 and the annual net benefit was QAR 779,539,440 (USD 214,100,351). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of results. Conclusion: The clinical pharmacist intervention is a cost-beneficial practice in the NCCCR setting, associated with ADEs prevention and substantial economic benefits, including relative to the interventions cost.


2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 24-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verena Getahun ◽  
William A. Keillor

This essay considers how cost-benefit analysis may be used in a small to mid-sized library to identify cost-savings in the acquisitions of monographs. The essay highlights parallel studies conducted at Luther Seminary Library and Bethel University Library which compared prices, discounts, and time costs across a range of vendor types to identify whether searching for the best price per item is cost-effective, and how much this strategy could save yearly in acquisitions. Both libraries found that substantial potential savings were identified through this study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document