Literature DB >> 20469954

The effect of a cardiovascular educational intervention on healthcare utilization and costs.

Amar C Nawathe1, Sherry A Glied, William S Weintraub, Lori J Mosca.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate healthcare utilization and costs following a cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening and educational special intervention (SI) compared with a control intervention (CIN) at 1 year in the Family-Based Intervention Trial for Heart Health. STUDY
DESIGN: Participants randomized to SI for screening and periodic lifestyle counseling were compared with participants randomized to CIN for resource utilization and associated costs at 1 year.
METHODS: A total of 421 participants (67% women and 37% minorities) were healthy family members of hospitalized patients with CVD who had 1-year follow-up resource utilization data. Resource utilization was systematically measured using a standardized questionnaire in both study groups and was validated by medical records in a subsample. Outcomes included provider visits, diagnostic studies, laboratory assessment, medication use, behavioral program enrollment, emergency department (ED) visits, hospital admissions, and healthcare costs.
RESULTS: At 1 year, there were significantly fewer overall provider visits (P = .04) and psychiatrist visits (P = .03) in SI versus CIN. There was a nonsignificant trend toward fewer ED visits, decreased hospital admissions, and shorter inpatient length of stay in SI versus CIN. Estimated healthcare expenditures for CIN exceeded those for SI by $590 per participant. The cost of the 1-year intervention was $95 per participant.
CONCLUSIONS: A 1-year standardized low-cost screening and educational intervention was associated with significantly fewer provider visits and with a nonsignificant trend toward reduced healthcare utilization for several parameters. The long-term effect on outcomes and costs deserves further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20469954      PMCID: PMC2956438     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Manag Care        ISSN: 1088-0224            Impact factor:   2.229


  16 in total

1.  A controlled trial of multiphasic screening in middle-age: results of the South-East London Screening Study. 1977.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Secondary healthcare contacts after multiphasic preventive health screening: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Janus L Thomsen; Bo Karlsmose; Erik T Parner; Ane M Thulstrup; Torsten Lauritzen; Marianne Engberg
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Effect of preventive health screening on long-term primary health care utilization. A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  J L Thomsen; E T Parner; B Karlsmose; A M Thulstrup; T Lauritzen; M Engberg
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2005-04-06       Impact factor: 2.267

4.  Multiphasic checkup evaluation study. 4. Preliminary cost benefit analysis for middle-aged men.

Authors:  M F Collen; L G Dales; G D Friedman; C D Flagle; R Feldman; A B Siegelaub
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1973-06       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Multiphasic checkup evaluation study. 3. Outpatient clinic utilization, hospitalization, and mortality experience after seven years.

Authors:  L G Dales; G D Friedman; S Ramcharan; A B Siegelaub; B A Campbell; R Feldman; M F Collen
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1973-06       Impact factor: 4.018

6.  Cost effectiveness and equity of a community based cardiovascular disease prevention programme in Norsjö, Sweden.

Authors:  L Lindholm; M Rosén; L Weinehall; K Asplund
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.710

7.  Dietitian intervention improves lipid values and saves medication costs in men with combined hyperlipidemia and a history of niacin noncompliance.

Authors:  G Sikand; M L Kashyap; N D Wong; J C Hsu
Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc       Date:  2000-02

8.  Benefits and costs of medical nutrition therapy by registered dietitians for patients with hypercholesterolemia. Massachusetts Dietetic Association.

Authors:  M M McGehee; E Q Johnson; H M Rasmussen; N Sahyoun; M M Lynch; M Carey
Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc       Date:  1995-09

9.  Strategies for reducing coronary risk factors in primary care: which is most cost effective?

Authors:  K Field; M Thorogood; C Silagy; C Normand; C O'Neill; J Muir
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-04-29

10.  Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030.

Authors:  Colin D Mathers; Dejan Loncar
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  2 in total

1.  Sex, age, and race/ethnicity do not modify the effectiveness of a diet intervention among family members of hospitalized cardiovascular disease patients.

Authors:  Heidi Mochari-Greenberger; Mary Beth Terry; Lori Mosca
Journal:  J Nutr Educ Behav       Date:  2011 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.045

2.  Can lay health trainers increase uptake of NHS Health Checks in hard-to-reach populations? A mixed-method pilot evaluation.

Authors:  S Visram; S M Carr; L Geddes
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 2.341

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.