Literature DB >> 35125328

A comparative study using time-driven activity-based costing in single-fraction breast high-dose rate brachytherapy: An integrated brachytherapy suite vs. decentralized workflow.

Gabriella C Squeo1, Courtney M Lattimore1, Nicole L Simone2, Greg Suralik3, Sunil W Dutta3, Michael D Schad3, Lucy Su3, Bruce Libby3, Einsley-Marie Janowski3, Shayna L Showalter1, Jennifer M Lobo4, Timothy N Showalter5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Precision breast intraoperative radiation therapy (PB-IORT) is a novel approach to adjuvant radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer performed as part of a phase II clinical trial at two institutions. One institution performs the entire procedure in an integrated brachytherapy suite which contains a CT-on-rails imaging unit and full anesthesia capabilities. At the other, breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy take place in two separate locations. Here, we utilize time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to compare these two models for the delivery of PB-IORT.
METHODS: Process maps were created to describe each step required to deliver PB-IORT at each institution, including personnel, equipment, and supplies. Time investment was estimated for each step. The capacity cost rate was determined for each resource, and total costs of care were then calculated by multiplying the capacity cost rates by the time estimate for the process step and adding any additional product costs.
RESULTS: PB-IORT costs less to deliver at a distributed facility, as is more commonly available, than an integrated brachytherapy suite ($3,262.22 vs. $3,996.01). The largest source of costs in both settings ($2,400) was consumable supplies, including the brachytherapy balloon applicator. The difference in costs for the two facility types was driven by personnel costs ($1,263.41 vs. $764.89). In the integrated facility, increased time required by radiation oncology nursing and the anesthesia attending translated to the greatest increases in cost. Equipment costs were also slightly higher in the integrated suite setting ($332.60 vs. $97.33).
CONCLUSIONS: The overall cost of care is higher when utilizing an integrated brachytherapy suite to deliver PB-IORT. This was primarily driven by additional personnel costs from nursing and anesthesia, although the greatest cost of delivery in both settings was the disposable brachytherapy applicator. These differences in cost must be balanced against the potential impact on patient experience with these approaches.
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Ct-on-rails; High dose-rate brachytherapy; Integrated brachytherapy suite; Intraoperative radiation therapy; Time-driven activity-based costing

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35125328      PMCID: PMC9149052          DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brachytherapy        ISSN: 1538-4721            Impact factor:   2.441


  16 in total

1.  Time-driven activity-based costing.

Authors:  Robert S Kaplan; Steven R Anderson
Journal:  Harv Bus Rev       Date:  2004-11

Review 2.  Value-based health care delivery.

Authors:  Michael E Porter
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  Techniques for intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Daniel M Trifiletti; Ryan Jones; Shayna L Showalter; Bruce B Libby; David R Brenin; Anneke Schroen; Monica M Morris; Kelli A Reardon; Timothy N Showalter
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.404

4.  Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing: A Comparative Cost Analysis of Whole-Breast Radiotherapy Versus Balloon-Based Brachytherapy in the Management of Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Matthew E Schutzer; Douglas W Arthur; Mitchell S Anscher
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 3.840

5.  Time-driven activity-based cost comparison of prostate cancer brachytherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Sunil W Dutta; Kristine Bauer-Nilsen; Jason C Sanders; Daniel M Trifiletti; Bruce Libby; Donna H Lash; Melody Lain; Deborah Christodoulou; Constance Hodge; Timothy N Showalter
Journal:  Brachytherapy       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Implementation of an HDR brachytherapy-based breast IORT program: Initial experiences.

Authors:  Sunil W Dutta; J Hunter Mehaffey; Jason C Sanders; Max O Meneveau; Courtney Lattimore; Bruce Libby; David R Brenin; Anneke T Schroen; Einsley M Janowski; Carl Lynch; Donna J Lash; Timothy N Showalter; Shayna L Showalter
Journal:  Brachytherapy       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Concordance with NCCN treatment guidelines: Relations with health care utilization, cost, and mortality in breast cancer patients with secondary metastasis.

Authors:  Gabrielle B Rocque; Courtney P Williams; Kelly M Kenzik; Bradford E Jackson; Andres Azuero; Karina I Halilova; Stacey A Ingram; Maria Pisu; Andres Forero; Smita Bhatia
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-10-14       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 8.  Defining Value in Radiation Oncology: Approaches to Weighing Benefits vs Costs.

Authors:  Andre A Konski
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  2017-04-15       Impact factor: 2.990

9.  A Novel Form of Breast Intraoperative Radiation Therapy With CT-Guided High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy: Results of a Prospective Phase 1 Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Shayna L Showalter; Gina Petroni; Daniel M Trifiletti; Bruce Libby; Anneke T Schroen; David R Brenin; Parchayi Dalal; Mark Smolkin; Kelli A Reardon; Timothy N Showalter
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2016-05-07       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Medical Care Costs Associated with Cancer Survivorship in the United States.

Authors:  Angela B Mariotto; Lindsey Enewold; Jingxuan Zhao; Christopher A Zeruto; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 4.090

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.