Post on 23-Feb-2016
description
transcript
Introduction to Health Care Value
Providing High-Value Cost-Conscious Care:
2012-2013 | Presentation #1 0f 10
Learning Objectives
• Define and emphasize the importance of high-value, cost-conscious care
• Introduce a simple five-step model for delivering high-value, cost-conscious care
• Discuss the cost implications of two common presentations of VTE disease (PE and DVT)
• Articulate strategies for bringing high-value care into daily practice
• Challenge participants to identify an action plan: at least one thing to start doing and one thing to stop doing
Patient Presentation – Mrs. G
• 59 y/o woman POD#3 from laparoscopic cholecystectomy• Patient was recovering well and plan was for discharge
today• Then, was ambulating with PT and became acutely SOB
and hypotensive to SBP 80s• She complained of right shoulder pain, became diaphoretic
and was brought urgently to the CCU where a stat TTE revealed a newly dilated RV
A Common Inpatient Diagnosis: PE
• Annual incidence in the U.S. estimated to be 600,000 (based on study of >42 million deaths)
• With introduction of CT-A the incidence estimates have increased to 112.3 per 100,000
• Untreated PE is associated with a 30% mortality rate! Recurrent embolism is most common cause of death
• 5-10% of deaths in hospitalized patients1
Cartoon by Dan Pirrarowww. Bizarro.com
Thompson et al, “Overview of Acute Pulmonary Embolism. Uptodate.com, accessed 11/11/11
The Economic Burden of PE
• The overall economic burden of PE in the U.S. is estimated to be over $1.5B per year in healthcare costs
• Some estimates suggest that PE results in healthcare costs of more than $30,000 per incident2
• Several studies have determined that prevention of PE in hospitalized patients is cost-effective, costing just $3,000 per pulmonary embolism event avoided3
Steps Toward High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care4
• Step one: Understand the benefits, harms, and relative costs of the interventions that you are considering
• Step two: Decrease or eliminate the use of interventions that provide no benefits and/or may be harmful
• Step three: Choose interventions and care settings that maximize benefits, minimize harms, and reduce costs (using comparative-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness data)
• Step four: Customize a care plan with the patient that incorporates their values and addresses their concerns
• Step five: Identify system level opportunities to improve outcomes, minimize harms, and reduce healthcare waste
Step 1: Benefits, Harms, CostsInitial Work-up for PE
What is your work-up for pulmonary embolism?
What factors lead us to make orders or recommendations for our patients?
Which labs or initial studies do you want to order?
How much does this cost?
Cartoon by T. McCrackenwww.mchumor.com
Benefits, Harms, Costs
Test Benefit Harm Costs
CT-PE protocolD-dimerFibrinogenBNPTroponin (x 4)ABGLE Doppler
Hypercoagulable work-up
Patient Presentation - UpdateAfter getting TTE that showed RV dysfunction and
+McConnell’s sign, our patient had the following studies performed:• CT-PE protocol +bilateral subsegmental PEs• D-dimer• Fibrinogen• BNP• Troponin x 4 : 0.5 1.6 1.3 0.6• ABG• LE Doppler U/S Negative for DVT
Step 1: Know the benefits, harms and costs of the interventions that you offer patients
NOTE: This is an actual case and charges are directly from a copy of her hospital bill
• TTE ($2,917)• CT-PE protocol ($3,558 + $462 contrast + risk of contrast
reaction + radiation exposure)• D-dimer ($410) • Fibrinogen ($100)• BNP ($338)
Step 1: Know the benefits, harms and costs of the interventions that you offer patients
(continued)
• Troponin x4 ($116 x 4 = $464 + risk of repeated phlebotomy)• ABG ($110 + risk of arterial stick)• LE Doppler U/S ($1,397)• Hypercoagulable panel ($2,250 - $3,050)
Cost of diagnostic work-up (not including all of the routine labs, etc. obtained): > $12,756
Step 2: Decrease or eliminate care that provides no benefit and/or may be harmfulWhich tests had the potential to change
management?
• CT-PE protocol• D-dimer• Fibrinogen• BNP• Troponin x 4• Hypercoagulable panel
WASTE
Disclaimer
• The prices listed are estimates based on actual hospital billso There are a lot of complexities to how things are priced and
how much a specific patient is charged o The goal is to give an idea of magnitudeo Costs reported here are hospital charges (found on a bill)
• Clinical reasoning and individualized care are very important
• Cost-conscious care is not about discouraging appropriate care, nor denying beneficial services
Value, Cost and Health Care
Cost ≠ Value
Cost ≠ Cost of Test
• Cost includes cost of test and downstream costs, benefits and harms
• High-cost interventions may provide good value because they are highly beneficial
• Low-cost interventions may have little or no value if they provide little benefit or increase downstream costs
Case #2
• Management of DVTo Two patients in an ambulatory setting were found to have
a DVTo One of the patients was sent to the Emergency
Department and hospitalized for management of the DVTo The other patient was started on LMWH and managed as
an outpatient• Split into two groups to review the two cases, with the
associated healthcare bills• Use the five-step model for each patient to identify what to
eliminate and what would be the best approach
Discussion• Hospitalized patient
o What costs surprised you?o What can be eliminated?o What would be the most elegant approach to work-up and
management?• Outpatient
o What costs surprised you?o What can be eliminated?o What would be the most elegant approach to work-up and
management?• EBM Update: Younger patients with calf DVTs, without
incapacitating pain have equal outcomes for $1,402/pt compared to hospitalized patients at $5,465 (1999 dollars)5
SummarySTART:• To use validated clinical scores
(Wells Criteria, Revised Geneva Score) and follow diagnostic algorithms to avoid overuse of tests
• To ask yourself before you order the test if the results will change what you do for the patient
STOP:• Do NOT routinely obtain LE U/S
studies and hypercoagulable panel in patients with acute PE
• Stop routinely sending patients with suspected DVT to the ED
EVIDENCE
Bibliography
1) Thompson et al, “Overview of Acute Pulmonary Embolism.” Uptodate.com, accessed 11/11/11
2) MacDougall DA, et al. Economic burden of deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and post-thrombotic syndrome. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006;63(suppl 6)
3) McGarry LJ, et al. Cost effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis with a low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in acutely ill medical inpatients. Am J Manag Care 2004;10:632–642
4) Adapted from Owens, D. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:174-180
5) Pearson S, Blair R, Halper A, Eddy E, McKean S. An outpatient program to treat deep venous thrombosis with low-molecular weight heparin. Effective Clinical Practice. 1999; 2:210-7