Browsing by Subject "Value"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Cost of Complications Following Major Resection of Malignant Neoplasia
    (Springer Nature, 2018-11) Zogg, Cheryl K.; Ottesen, Taylor D.; Kebaish, Kareem; Galivanche, Anoop; Murthy, Shilpa; Changoor, Navin R.; Zogg, Donald L.; Pawlik, Timothy M.; Haider, Adil H.; Surgery, School of Medicine
    BACKGROUND: Rising healthcare costs have led to increased focus on the need to achieve a higher "value of care." As value-maximization efforts expand to include more complex surgical patients, evidence to support meaningful implementation of complication-based initiatives is lacking. The objective of this study was to compare incremental costs of complications following major gastrointestinal (GI) resections for organ-specific malignant neoplasia using nationally representative data. METHODS: National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample data, 2001-2014, were queried for adult (≥ 18 years) patients undergoing major resections for malignant neoplasia. Based on system-based complications considered relevant to the long-term treatment of GI disease, stratified differences in risk-adjusted incremental hospital costs and complication probabilities were compared. Differences in surgical outcomes and costs over time were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 293,967 patients were included, weighted to represent 1,408,117 patients nationwide. One fourth (26.1%; 95% CI, 25.7-26.4%) experienced ≥ 1 pre-discharge complication (range, 45.3% esophagectomy to 24.0% rectal resection). Resultant annual risk-adjusted incremental hospital costs totaled $540 million nationwide (19.5% of the overall cost of care and an average of $20,900 per patient). Costs varied substantially with both cancer/resection type and complication group, ranging from $76.7 million for colectomies with infectious complications to $0.2 million for rectal resections with urinary complications. For each resection type, infectious ($154.7 million), GI ($85.5 million), and pulmonary ($77.9 million) complications were among the most significant drivers of increased hospital cost. CONCLUSIONS: Quantifying and comparing the impact of complications on an indication-specific level in more complex patients offers an important step toward allowing providers/payers to meaningfully prioritize the design of novel and adaptation of existing value-maximization approaches.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Discovering Value and Impact: Evaluating a New Art Therapy in Neuroscience and Medicine Program
    (2017) Riddle, Maria; King, Juliet
    This study is a mixed-method approach for evaluating a new Art Therapy in Neuroscience and Medicine (ATNM) program within an outpatient academic medical center that provides a range of medical and psychiatric services to individuals with neurologic and psychiatric conditions. The aims were to assess the value of the ATNM program and the impact it has on affecting depressive mood among individuals who were receiving art therapy services (N=15). The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8) were used to obtain baseline data regarding depressive mood and client satisfaction. Patient demographics were gathered using the ATNM tracking system and the medical center’s electronic medical record system to further understand the value and impact of the program. The preliminary data indicated an overall significant level of depression and anxiety among the referrals of patients having chronic neurological conditions. A high level of patient satisfaction and substantial benefit from art therapy intervention was noted in the results from the CSQ-8. Further evaluation of the program is recommended as an ongoing part of assessing the impact and value of the ATNM program.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hospital value–based purchasing: How acute care advanced practice nurses demonstrate value
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2021-09-17) Constable, Mark; Mulkey, Malissa; Aucoin, Julia; School of Nursing
    Hospital value–based purchasing (HVBP) is a budget neutral initiative from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services designed to adjust the hospital payment system based on health care quality data. Hospital value–based purchasing is designed to promote improved clinical outcomes and better patient experience in the acute care setting. Advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) in the acute care setting are instrumental to the success of health care institutions under the current payer model in the United States health care system. When APRNs use their advanced knowledge and leadership skills to champion quality improvement and patient experience projects, they may increase financial reimbursement within the HVBP system, thus demonstrating value to the health care institution. Four basic steps could help APRNs demonstrate value to the organization, understand the standard, evaluate your performance compared with the standard, identify opportunities, and implement projects or participate in projects. This article provides a broad overview of the HVBP structure and describes how APRNs can positively influence performance measures, thereby potentially increasing hospital reimbursement.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Neighborhood socioeconomic status and low-value breast cancer care
    (Wiley, 2022) Chen, J. C.; Li, Yaming; Fisher, James L.; Bhattacharyya, Oindrila; Tsung, Allan; Obeng‐Gyasi, Samilia; Economics, School of Liberal Arts
    Background: The objective of this study is to examine the association between neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) and receipt of low-value breast cancer procedures. Methods: Patients with breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Low value procedures included: (1) axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with limited nodal disease receiving breast conservation therapy (BCT); (2) contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (CPM); and (3) sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) in patients ≥70 years old with clinically node negative early-stage hormone-positive breast cancer. The cohort was divided by nSES. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis compared the groups. Results: The study included 412 959 patients. Compared to patients in high nSES areas, residing in neighborhoods with low nSES (odd ratio [OR] 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-2.42) and middle nSES (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20-1.56) was associated with a higher probability of undergoing low value ALND. Conversely, patients in low SES neighborhoods were less likely to receive low value SLNB (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.94) or CPM than (low nSES OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.77); middle nSES OR 0.91 (0.89-0.92) those in high SES neighborhoods. Conclusion: In the SEER Program, low nSES was associated with a lower probability of low value procedures except for ALND utilization.