首页> 外文期刊>Orthopedic Research and Reviews >Economic burden of illness among US patients experiencing fracture nonunion
【24h】

Economic burden of illness among US patients experiencing fracture nonunion

机译:骨折不愈合的美国患者的经济疾病负担

获取原文
       

摘要

Objectives: To compare economic outcomes in a real-world study of patients with fracture nonunion receiving non-invasive electrical bone growth stimulation (EBGS), low-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulation (LIPUS), or other non-stimulation fracture management interventions (No-stim). Methods: Medical and pharmacy claims from a US commercially-insured population were analyzed to select adult patients newly diagnosed with a fracture nonunion between July 2006 and September 2009. The date of initial nonunion diagnosis was set as the index date. Three cohorts were constructed based on the first treatment prescribed post index date: EBGS, LIPUS, or No-stim. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and health care costs 9 months before and 1 year after the index date were assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to compare health care costs between cohorts in the post index period. Results: 11,628 patients (mean age 45.4 years; 45.7% males) with a fracture nonunion were identified within the three treatment groups (EBGS: 29.5%, LIPUS: 12.3%, and No-stim: 58.2%). In the post-index period, EBGS patients were significantly less likely to receive fracture-related treatments when compared to the LIPUS (33.6% vs 42.2%, P < 0.01) and the No-stim (33.6% vs 60.3%, P < 0.01) cohorts. Additionally, after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, the EBGS cohort had significantly lower predicted health care-associated costs 1 year post index date when compared to the LIPUS (mean: $21,632 vs $23,964, P < 0.01) and the No-stim (mean: $21,632 vs $23,843, P < 0.01) cohorts. Furthermore, the predicted fracture-related costs (FRC) of EBGS patients were also significantly lower than the FRC of the LIPUS (mean: $9100 vs $10,255, P < 0.01) and the No-stim (mean: $9100 vs $10,354, P < 0.01) patients. Conclusion: In a real-world setting, EBGS is a more cost-effective fracture nonunion treatment across a variety of fracture locations when compared to LIPUS or No-stim. Fracture nonunion patients receiving EBGS had lower total health care resource use and overall costs as compared to LIPUS or No-stim.
机译:目标:在一项针对接受非侵入性骨生长刺激(EBGS),低强度脉冲超声刺激(LIPUS)或其他非刺激性骨折管理干预措施(No-刺激)。方法:对美国一个商业保险人群的医疗和药学要求进行分析,以选择2006年7月至2009年9月之间新诊断为骨折不愈合的成年患者。将最初不愈合诊断的日期设置为索引日期。根据指定的索引日期后的第一种治疗方法构建了三个队列:EBGS,LIPUS或无刺激。评估指标日期之前9个月和之后1年的基线人口统计资料,临床特征和医疗保健费用。进行了多元回归分析,以比较指数期后各组之间的医疗保健费用。结果:在三个治疗组(EBGS:29.5%,LIPUS:12.3%,无刺激:58.2%)中,鉴定出11,628例患者(平均年龄45.4岁;男性45.7%)。在指数后时期,与LIPUS(33.6%vs 42.2%,P <0.01)和无刺激(33.6%vs 60.3%,P <0.01)相比,EBGS患者接受骨折相关治疗的可能性明显降低。 )队列。此外,在调整了人口统计学和临床​​特征后,与LIPUS(平均:21,632美元对23,964美元,P <0.01)和无刺激(平均)相比,EBGS研究组在索引日期后1年的预测的医疗保健相关费用显着降低。 :$ 21,632 vs $ 23,843,P <0.01)。此外,EBGS患者的骨折相关成本(FRC)的预测值也显着低于LIPUS的FRC(平均值:$ 9100 vs $ 10,255,P <0.01)和无刺激(平均值:$ 9100 vs $ 10,354,P <0.01) ) 耐心。结论:在现实世界中,与LIPUS或No-stim相比,EBGS是在各个骨折位置上更具成本效益的骨折不愈合治疗。与LIPUS或No-stim相比,接受EBGS的骨折不愈合患者的总医疗保健资源使用和总体成本较低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号