【24h】

Medicare long-term CPAP coverage policy: a cost-utility analysis.

机译:Medicare CPAP长期保险政策:成本-效用分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

STUDY OBJECTIVES: CPAP is an effective treatment for OSA that may reduce health care utilization and costs. Medicare currently reimburses the costs of long-term CPAP therapy only if the patient is adherent during a 90-day trial. If not, Medicare requires a repeat polysomnogram (PSG) and another trial which seems empirically not cost-effective. We modeled the cost-effectiveness of current Medicare policy compared to an alternative policy (clinic-only) without the adherence criterion and repeat PSG.DESIGN: Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis.SETTING: U.S. Medicare Population.PATIENTS ORPARTICIPANTS: N/A.INTERVENTIONS: N/A.MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: We created a decision tree modeling (1) clinic only follow-up vs. (2) current Medicare policy. Costs were assigned based on Medicare reimbursement rates in 2012. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test our assumptions. We estimated cumulative costs, overall adherence, and QALY gained for a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of Medicare as the payer. Current Medicare policy is more costly than the clinic-only policy but has higher net adherence and improved utility. Current Medicare policy compared to clinic-only policy costs $30,544 more per QALY.CONCLUSIONS: Current CMS policy promotes early identification of those more likely to adhere to CPAP therapy by requiring strict adherence standards. The policy effect is to deny coverage to those unlikely to use CPAP long-term and prevent wasted resources. Future studies are needed to measure long-term adherence in an elderly population with and without current adherence requirements to verify the cost-effectiveness of a policy change.
机译:研究目的:CPAP是OSA的有效治疗方法,可降低医疗保健利用率和成本。仅当患者在90天的试验期间依从时,Medicare目前才报销长期CPAP治疗的费用。如果不是这样,则Medicare需要重复进行多导睡眠图(PSG)和另一项试验,从经验上讲,该试验似乎并不划算。我们将当前的Medicare政策与没有遵循标准的替代政策(仅诊所)相比的成本效益进行了建模,并重复了PSG。设计:成本效用和成本效益分析设置:美国Medicare人口患者受试者:N / A.干预措施:N / A。测量与结果:我们创建了决策树模型(1)仅诊所随访与(2)当前的Medicare政策。费用是根据2012年的Medicare报销率分配的。进行了敏感性分析以检验我们的假设。我们从Medicare作为付款人的角度估计了5年时间范围内的累积成本,总体遵守率和QALY。当前的Medicare政策比仅诊所政策更昂贵,但是具有更高的净依从性和更好的效用。与仅针对诊所的政策相比,当前的Medicare政策每个QALY的费用要高出30544美元。结论:当前的CMS政策通过要求严格的遵守标准,可以促进早期发现那些更可能接受CPAP治疗的人。该政策的作用是拒绝那些不太可能长期使用CPAP的人,并防止浪费资源。需要进行进一步的研究来测量老年人群中是否有当前依从性要求的长期依从性,以验证政策变更的成本效益。

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