Literature DB >> 28249074

Variation in the Cost of Managing Actinic Keratosis.

Joslyn S Kirby1, Tanner Gregory2, Guodong Liu3, Douglas L Leslie3, Jeffrey J Miller1.   

Abstract

Importance: Actinic keratosis (AK), a skin growth induced by ultraviolet light exposure, requires chronic management because a small proportion can progress into squamous cell skin cancer. Spending for AK management was more than $1 billion in 2004. Investigating geographic variation in AK spending presents an opportunity to decrease waste or recoup excess spending. Objective: To evaluate geographic variation in health care cost for management of AKs and the association with patient-related and health-related factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was performed using data from the MarketScan medical claims database of 488 324 continuously enrolled members with 2 or more claims for AK. Data from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2012, was used. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual costs of care were calculated for outpatient visits, AK destruction, and medications for AKs, and the total of these components. Costs were adjusted for inflation to 2014 US dollars. To display cost variation, we calculated the ratio of mean cost in the highest quintile (Q5) relative to the mean in the lowest quintile (Q1), or the Q5:Q1 ratio; Q5:Q1 ratios were adjusted based on age, sex, history of nonmelanoma skin cancer, US geographic region, and population density (metropolitan statistical area).
Results: Overall, data from 488 324 continuously enrolled members (mean [SD] age, 53.1 [7.5] years; 243 662 women) with 2 or more claims for AK were included. Overall, patients had 1 085 985 claims related to AK, and dermatologists accounted for 71.0% of claims. The 2-year total cost was $111.5 million, with $52.4 million in 2011 and $59.1 million in 2012. The unadjusted Q5:Q1 ratios for total annual cost per patient ranged from 9.49 to 15.10. Adjusted ratios ranged from 1.72 to 1.80. Conclusions and Relevance: There is variation in AK management cost within and between regions. This is not fully explained by differences in patient characteristics such as age, sex, or comorbidities. The annual cost for 10 common conditions from Medicare had lower Q5:Q1 ratios that ranged from 1.33 (joint degeneration of back/neck) to 1.69 (chronic sinusitis) when compared with 1.72 to 1.80 for AKs. This suggests an opportunity to investigate and improve the value of health care delivery in the management of AKs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28249074      PMCID: PMC5470414          DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.4733

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Dermatol        ISSN: 2168-6068            Impact factor:   10.282


  25 in total

Review 1.  A survey of office visits for actinic keratosis as reported by NAMCS, 1990-1999. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

Authors:  Aditya K Gupta; Elizabeth A Cooper; Steven R Feldman; Alan B Fleischer
Journal:  Cutis       Date:  2002-08

2.  What is value in health care?

Authors:  Michael E Porter
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Geographic variation in health care spending in the United States: insights from an Institute of Medicine report.

Authors:  Joseph P Newhouse; Alan M Garber
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Use of and beliefs about total body photography and dermatoscopy among US dermatology training programs: an update.

Authors:  Vitaly Terushkin; Susan A Oliveria; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Allan C Halpern
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 11.527

5.  Duration of oral antibiotic therapy for the treatment of adult acne: a retrospective analysis investigating adherence to guideline recommendations and opportunities for cost-savings.

Authors:  Chelsey E Straight; Young H Lee; Guodong Liu; Joslyn S Kirby
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 11.527

6.  The association of physician-specialty density and melanoma prognosis in the United States, 1988 to 1993.

Authors:  Melody J Eide; Martin A Weinstock; Melissa A Clark
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2008-10-19       Impact factor: 11.527

7.  Patients' preferences explain a small but significant share of regional variation in medicare spending.

Authors:  Laurence C Baker; M Kate Bundorf; Daniel P Kessler
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 6.301

8.  Slowing the growth of health care costs--lessons from regional variation.

Authors:  Elliott S Fisher; Julie P Bynum; Jonathan S Skinner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  Actinic Keratosis Clinical Practice Guidelines: An Appraisal of Quality.

Authors:  Joslyn S Kirby; Thomas Scharnitz; Elizabeth V Seiverling; Hadjh Ahrns; Sara Ferguson
Journal:  Dermatol Res Pract       Date:  2015-09-16

10.  Factors associated with geographic variation in cost per episode of care for three medical conditions.

Authors:  Jack Hadley; James D Reschovsky; James A O'Malley; Bruce E Landon
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2014-05-09
View more
  4 in total

1.  Use and Cost of Actinic Keratosis Destruction in the Medicare Part B Fee-for-Service Population, 2007 to 2015.

Authors:  Howa Yeung; Marissa L Baranowski; Robert A Swerlick; Suephy C Chen; Jennifer Hemingway; Danny R Hughes; Richard Duszak
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 10.282

2.  Validation of actinic keratosis diagnosis and treatment codes among veterans living with HIV.

Authors:  Krittin J Supapannachart; Chase W Kwon; Sokol Tushe; Jodie L Guest; Suephy C Chen; Howa Yeung
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 2.732

3.  The validity of diagnostic and treatment codes for actinic keratosis in electronic health records.

Authors:  O G Cohen; D J Margolis; M R Wehner
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 9.302

4.  Healthcare utilization and management of actinic keratosis in primary and secondary care: a complementary database analysis.

Authors:  E C Noels; L M Hollestein; S van Egmond; M Lugtenberg; L P J van Nistelrooij; P J E Bindels; J van der Lei; R S Stern; T Nijsten; M Wakkee
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2019-04-19       Impact factor: 9.302

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.