RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost associated with sleep apnea and effects of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment on costs among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Retrospective cohort design using 5% Medicare claims between 2006 and 2010. Medicare beneficiaries with and without sleep apnea diagnosis between 2007 and 2008 were identified and followed retrospectively for 2 years pre-index-date and 2 years post-index-date. We defined CPAP fill as at least one durable medical equipment claim for CPAP in 6-month period. At least three CPAP fills was defined as "full adherence," and one or two CPAP fills was "partial adherence." We used interrupted time series and generalized linear log-link models to study the association between sleep apnea, CPAP treatment, and costs. To minimize bias, we used propensity score and instrumental variables approach. RESULTS: Sleep apnea was associated with higher costs (odds ratio [OR] = 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.58, 1.63) compared to those without sleep apnea. Almost half of those with sleep apnea received CPAP treatment. Interrupted time series analysis indicated post level increase in mean monthly cost for full CPAP adherence group, partial CPAP adherence group and no-CPAP group. However, the increase was smallest for the full CPAP adherence group. Full CPAP adherence was associated with lower change in cost (OR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.88, 0.97) compared to the no-CPAP group. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with sleep apnea experience increased cost. Full adherence to CPAP treatment for sleep apnea was associated with lower increase in cost. These findings emphasize the need to effectively identify and treat sleep apnea in Medicare patients.
Assuntos
Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas/economia , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/economia , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/terapia , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas/instrumentação , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Cooperação do Paciente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To study the effectiveness of the Patient Preferences for Prostate Cancer Care (PreProCare) intervention in improving the primary outcome of satisfaction with care and secondary outcomes of satisfaction with decision, decision regret, and treatment choice among patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled study, we randomly assigned patients with localized prostate cancer to the PreProCare intervention or usual care. Outcomes were satisfaction with care, satisfaction with decision, decision regret, and treatment choice. Assessments were performed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and were analyzed using repeated measures. We compared treatment choice across intervention groups by prostate cancer risk categories. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and March 2015, 743 patients with localized prostate cancer were recruited and randomly assigned to receive PreProCare (n = 372) or usual care (n = 371). For the general satisfaction subscale, improvement at 24 months from baseline was significantly different between groups (P < .001). For the intervention group, mean scores at 24 months improved by 0.44 (SE, 0.06; P < .001) from baseline. This improvement was 0.5 standard deviation, which was clinically significant. The proportion reporting satisfaction with decision and no regret increased over time and was higher for the intervention group, compared with the usual care group at 24 months (P < .05). Among low-risk patients, a higher proportion of the intervention group was receiving active surveillance, compared with the usual care group (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Our patient-centered PreProCare intervention improved satisfaction with care, satisfaction with decision, reduced regrets, and aligned treatment choice with risk category. The majority of our participants had a high income, with implications for generalizability. Additional studies can evaluate the effectiveness of PreProCare as a mechanism for improving clinical and patient-reported outcomes in different settings.