Explore the vast range of titles available.

To carry out an economic evaluation of a task-shifting intervention for the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders in primary-care settings in Goa, India. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses based on generalized linear models were performed within a trial set in 24 public and private primary-care facilities. Subjects were randomly assigned to an intervention or a control arm. Eligible subjects in the intervention arm were given psycho-education, case management, interpersonal psychotherapy and/or antidepressants by lay health workers. Subjects in the control arm were treated by physicians. The use of health-care resources, the disability of each subject and degree of psychiatric morbidity, as measured by the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule, were determined at 2, 6 and 12 months. Complete data, from all three follow-ups, were collected from 1243 (75.4%) and 938 (81.7%) of the subjects enrolled in the study facilities from the public and private sectors, respectively. Within the public facilities, subjects in the intervention arm showed greater improvement in all the health outcomes investigated than those in the control arm. Time costs were also significantly lower in the intervention arm than in the control arm, whereas health system costs in the two arms were similar. Within the private facilities, however, the effectiveness and costs recorded in the two arms were similar. Within public primary-care facilities in Goa, the use of lay health workers in the care of subjects with common mental disorders was not only cost-effective but also cost-saving.

Purpose Suturing with small stitches instead of with large reduces the risk for surgical site infection and incisional hernia in continuously closed midline abdominal incisions. The purpose was to analyse if using small stitches generated cost savings. Methods Between 2001 and 2006 closure of midline incisions using small stitches was, in a randomised trial, compared with the use of large stitches. In 2011 all patients included in the randomised trial, who until then, had had an incisional hernia repair, were recorded. The cost for an open incisional hernia repair with mesh reinforcement during 2010 was calculated. The analysis included both direct and indirect costs. Results Of 321 patients closed with small stitches incisional hernia occurred in 11 and 3 needed repair. Of 370 patients closed with large stitches herniation occurred in 45 and 14 needed repair. The direct cost per hernia repair was 59,909 Swedish krona (SEK) and the indirect cost was 26,348 SEK. Suturing time with small stitches was 4.6 min longer, increasing the cost for the index operation by 1,076 SEK. From the societal perspective (direct and indirect costs), using small stitches generated a cost reduction of 1,339 SEK for each patient. From the perspective of the public payer (direct costs) the cost reduction was 601 SEK. Using small stitches generated cost savings from a societal perspective if the suturing time was not prolonged over 10.3 min. Conclusions Using small stitches when closing midline abdominal incisions with a continuous single-layer technique generates cost savings.

Background Presentations to hospital of older people receiving family care at home incur substantial costs for patients, families, and the health care system, yet there can be positive carer outcomes when systematically assessing/addressing their support needs, and reductions in older people’s returns to hospital attributed to appropriate discharge planning. This study will trial the Further Enabling Care at Home program, a 2-week telephone outreach initiative for family carers of older people returning home from hospital. Hypotheses are that the program will (a) better prepare families to sustain their caregiving role and (b) reduce patients' re-presentations/readmissions to hospital, and/or their length of stay; also that reduced health system costs attributable to the program will outweigh costs of its implementation. Methods/Design In this randomised controlled trial, family carers of older patients aged 70+ discharged from a Medical Assessment Unit in a Western Australian tertiary hospital, plus the patients themselves, will be recruited at discharge ( N  = 180 dyads). Carers will be randomly assigned (block allocation, assessors blinded) to receive usual care (control) or the new program (intervention). The primary outcome is the carer’s self-reported preparedness for caregiving (Preparedness for Caregiving Scale administered within 4 days of discharge, 2–3 weeks post-discharge, 6 weeks post-discharge). To detect a clinically meaningful change of two points with 80 % power, 126 carers need to complete the study. Patients’ returns to hospital and subsequent length of stay will be ascertained for a minimum of 3 months after the index admission. Regression analyses will be used to determine differences in carer and patient outcomes over time associated with the group (intervention or control). Data will be analysed using an Intention to Treat approach. A qualitative exploration will examine patients’ and their family carers’ experiences of the new program (interviews) and explore the hospital staff’s perceptions (focus groups). Process evaluation will identify barriers to, and facilitators of, program implementation. A comprehensive economic evaluation will determine cost consequences. Discussion This study investigates a novel approach to identifying and addressing family carers’ needs following discharge from hospital of the older person receiving care. If successful, the program has potential to be incorporated into routine post-discharge support. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12614001174673 .

Payers are considering bundled payments for inpatient surgery, combining provider reimbursements into a single payment for the entire episode. We found that current Medicare episode payments for certain inpatient procedures varied by 49-130 percent across hospitals sorted into five payment groups. Intentional differences in payments attributable to such factors as geography or illness severity explained much of this variation. But after adjustment for these differences, per episode payments to the highest-cost hospitals were higher than those to the lowest-cost facilities by up to $2,549 for colectomy and $7,759 for back surgery. Postdischarge care accounted for a large proportion of the variation in payments, as did discretionary physician services, which may be driven in turn by variations in surgeons' practice styles. Our study suggests that bundled payments could yield sizable savings for payers, although the effect on individual institutions will vary because hospitals that were relatively expensive for one procedure were often relatively inexpensive for others. More broadly, our data suggest that many hospitals have considerable room to improve their cost efficiency for inpatient surgery and should look for patterns of excess utilization, particularly among surgical specialties, other inpatient specialist consultations, and various types of postdischarge care. Adapted from the source document.

Policy Points Concerns have been raised about risk selection in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). Specifically, turnover in accountable care organization (ACO) physicians and patient panels has led to concerns that ACOs may be earning shared‐savings bonuses by selecting lower‐risk patients or providers with lower‐risk panels. We find no evidence that changes in ACO patient populations explain savings estimates from previous evaluations through 2015. We also find no evidence that ACOs systematically manipulated provider composition or billing to earn bonuses. The modest savings and lack of risk selection in the original MSSP design suggest opportunities to build on early progress. Recent program changes provide ACOs with more opportunity to select providers with lower‐risk patients. Understanding the effect of these changes will be important for guiding future payment policy. Context The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) establishes incentives for participating accountable care organizations (ACOs) to lower spending for their attributed fee‐for‐service Medicare patients. Turnover in ACO physicians and patient panels has raised concerns that ACOs may be earning shared‐savings bonuses by selecting lower‐risk patients or providers with lower‐risk panels. Methods We conducted three sets of analyses of Medicare claims data. First, we estimated overall MSSP savings through 2015 using a difference‐in‐differences approach and methods that eliminated selection bias from ACO program exit or changes in the practices or physicians included in ACO contracts. We then checked for residual risk selection at the patient level. Second, we reestimated savings with methods that address undetected risk selection but could introduce bias from other sources. These included patient fixed effects, baseline or prospective assignment, and area‐level MSSP exposure to hold patient populations constant. Third, we tested for changes in provider composition or provider billing that may have contributed to bonuses, even if they were eliminated as sources of bias in the evaluation analyses. Findings MSSP participation was associated with modest and increasing annual gross savings in the 2012‐2013 entry cohorts of ACOs that reached$139 to $ 302 per patient by 2015. Savings in the 2014 entry cohort were small and not statistically significant. Robustness checks revealed no evidence of residual risk selection. Alternative methods to address risk selection produced results that were substantively consistent with our primary analysis but varied somewhat and were more sensitive to adjustment for patient characteristics, suggesting the introduction of bias from within‐patient changes in time‐varying characteristics. We found no evidence of ACO manipulation of provider composition or billing to inflate savings. Finally, larger savings for physician group ACOs were robust to consideration of differential changes in organizational structure among non‐ACO providers (eg, from consolidation). Conclusions Participation in the original MSSP program was associated with modest savings and not with favorable risk selection. These findings suggest an opportunity to build on early progress. Understanding the effect of new opportunities and incentives for risk selection in the revamped MSSP will be important for guiding future program reforms.

Context: Rising drug prices are putting pressure on health care budgets. Policymakers are assessing how they can save money through generic drugs. Methods: We compared generic drug prices and market shares in 13 European countries, using data from 2013, to assess the amount of variation that exists between countries. To place these results in context, we reviewed evidence from recent studies on the prices and use of generics in Europe and the United States. We also surveyed peer-reviewed studies, gray literature, and books published since 2000 to (1) outline existing generic drug policies in European countries and the United States; (2) identify ways to increase generic drug use and to promote price competition among generic drug companies; and (3) explore barriers to implementing reform of generic drug policies, using a historical example from the United States as a case study. Findings: The prices and market shares of generics vary widely across Europe. For example, prices charged by manufacturers in Switzerland are, on average, more than 2.5 times those in Germany and more than 6 times those in the United Kingdom, based on the results of a commonly used price index. The proportion of prescriptions filled with generics ranges from 17% in Switzerland to 83% in the United Kingdom. By comparison, the United States has historically had low generic drug prices and high rates of generic drug use (84% in 2013), but has in recent years experienced sharp price increases for some off-patent products. There are policy solutions to address issues in Europe and the United States, such as streamlining the generic drug approval process and requiring generic prescribing and substitution where such policies are not yet in place. The history of substitution laws in the United States provides insights into the economic, political, and cultural issues influencing the adoption of generic drug policies. Conclusions: Governments should apply coherent supply- and demand-side policies in generic drug markets. An immediate priority is to convince more physicians, pharmacists, and patients that generic drugs are bioequivalent to branded products. Special-interest groups continue to obstruct reform in Europe and the United States.

Although health care expenditure per capita is higher in the USA than in any other country, more than 37 million Americans do not have health insurance, and 41 million more have inadequate access to care. Efforts are ongoing to repeal the Affordable Care Act which would exacerbate health-care inequities. By contrast, a universal system, such as that proposed in the Medicare for All Act, has the potential to transform the availability and efficiency of American health-care services. Taking into account both the costs of coverage expansion and the savings that would be achieved through the Medicare for All Act, we calculate that a single-payer, universal health-care system is likely to lead to a 13% savings in national health-care expenditure, equivalent to more than US$450 billion annually (based on the value of the US$ in 2017). The entire system could be funded with less financial outlay than is incurred by employers and households paying for health-care premiums combined with existing government allocations. This shift to single-payer health care would provide the greatest relief to lower-income households. Furthermore, we estimate that ensuring health-care access for all Americans would save more than 68 000 lives and 1·73 million life-years every year compared with the status quo.

Health care reform debate in the United States is largely focused on the highly concentrated health care costs among a small proportion of the population and policy proposals to identify and target this “high-cost” group. To better understand this population, we conducted an analysis for the Institute of Medicine Committee on Approaching Death using existing national data sets, peer-reviewed literature, and published reports. We estimated that in 2011, among those with the highest costs, only 11% were in their last year of life, and approximately 13% of the $1.6 trillion spent on personal health care costs in the United States was devoted to care of individuals in their last year of life. Public health interventions to reduce health care costs should target those with long-term chronic conditions and functional limitations.

Background Among the most studied evidence-based programs, the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) has been shown to help participants improve their health behaviors, health outcomes, and reduce healthcare utilization. However, there is a lack of information on how CDSMP, when nationally disseminated, impacts healthcare utilization and averts healthcare costs. The purposes of this study were to: 1) document reductions in healthcare utilization among national CDSMP participants; 2) calculate potential cost savings associated with emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations; and 3) extrapolate the cost savings estimation to the American adults. Methods The national study of CDSMP surveyed 1,170 community-dwelling CDSMP participants at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months from 22 organizations in 17 states. The procedure used to estimate potential cost savings included: 1) examining the pattern of healthcare utilization among CDSMP participants from self-reported healthcare utilization assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months; 2) calculating age-adjusted average costs for persons using the 2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey; 3) calculating costs saved from reductions in healthcare utilization; 4) estimating per participant program costs; 5) computing potential cost savings by deducting program costs from estimated healthcare savings; and 6) extrapolating savings to national populations using Census data combined with national health statistics. Results Findings from analyses showed significant reductions in ER visits (5%) at both the 6-month and 12-month assessments as well as hospitalizations (3%) at 6 months among national CDSMP participants. This equates to potential net savings of $364 per participant and a national savings of $3.3 billion if 5% of adults with one or more chronic conditions were reached. Conclusions Findings emphasize the value of public health tertiary prevention interventions and the need for policies to support widespread adoption of CDSMP.

Materials management personnel at a health care facility in Baltimore, Maryland, were stocking too much suture. They stocked suture requested by surgeons or recommended by suture company representatives, and, because the facility is a teaching institution, they stocked suture requested by residents. No master suture database was available to determine what was needed and what was not. As a result, some suture was rarely used, which cost the facility money and took up inventory space. In response, I created a list of the existing inventory and coordinated with the specialty surgical service coordinators to determine which suture was typically used and in what quantities. I used this information to create a master list, with the goal of eliminating the purchase of suture that was not on this list. I gave the staff members and surgeons two months to assess the list and determine whether the suggested suture was sufficient for their needs. I then asked the materials management personnel to order and maintain suture stock based on the master list. This process took approximately four months and shows how health care providers can take a high-volume item, such as suture, and create cost-saving processes that will serve surgeons' and patients' needs while reducing costs and streamlining stock.