Research funding was provided by TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc.



Similar documents
FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH HEALTHCARE COSTS AMONG ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH DIABETIC NEUROPATHY

Methods for Measuring Dose Escalation in TNF Antagonists for Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated in Routine Clinical Practice

EXPANDING THE EVIDENCE BASE IN OUTCOMES RESEARCH: USING LINKED ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS (EMR) AND CLAIMS DATA

Major Depressive Disorder:

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and Barrett s Esophagus (BE)

Costs of Medical Care for Dementia Patients in Taiwan: A Population-Based Study

Proton Pump Inhibitor Utilization Patterns in Infants

Costs Associated with Neutropenia in Elderly Patients Treated First-Line for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

CHARACTERISTICS & OUTCOMES OF INSURED PATIENTS TREATED WITH EXTENDED- RELEASE NALTREXONE (XR-NTX) OR ORAL ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE MEDICATIONS

PROPOSED US MEDICARE RULING FOR USE OF DRUG CLAIMS INFORMATION FOR OUTCOMES RESEARCH, PROGRAM ANALYSIS & REPORTING AND PUBLIC FUNCTIONS

How Can We Get the Best Medication History?

Risk Adjustment ABC s

Standardizing the measurement of drug exposure

A comparison of myhealthcare Cost Estimator users and nonusers: Effect on provider choices

SULFONYLUREA USE AND RISK OF HIP FRACTURES AMONG ELDERLY MEN AND WOMEN WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES

Disparities in Realized Access: Patterns of Health Services Utilization by Insurance Status among Children with Asthma in Puerto Rico

How To Calculate The Cost Of Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Racial Disparities and Barrier to Statin Utilization in Patients with Diabetes in the U.S. School of Pharmacy Virginia Commonwealth University

Disclosures. Real World Data Sources

Homecare Health & Medical Billing Data Science Study

9 Expenditure on breast cancer

Early mortality rate (EMR) in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)

Exploratory data: COPD and blood eosinophils. David Price: am

Medicare Risk-Adjustment & Correct Coding 101. Rev. 10_31_14. Provider Training

What is Barrett s esophagus? How does Barrett s esophagus develop?

Upstate New York adults with diagnosed type 1 and type 2 diabetes and estimated treatment costs

Predictors of Physical Therapy Use in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Outcome of Drug Counseling of Outpatients in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Clinic at Thawangpha Hospital

The hidden endoscopic burden of sleeve gastrectomy and its comparison with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Hospitals and Health Systems:

Secondary Uses of Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research

REIMBURSEMENT, CAPITATION AND RISK ADJUSTMENT

Inhibit terminal acid secretion from parietal cells by blocking H + /K + - ATPase pump

Association between Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clostridium difficile

Robert Okwemba, BSPHS, Pharm.D Philadelphia College of Pharmacy

Prior Authorization, Pharmacy and Health Case Management Information. Prior Authorization. Pharmacy Information. Health Case Management

A Guide for the Utilization of HIRA National Patient Samples. Logyoung Kim, Jee-Ae Kim, Sanghyun Kim. Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service

Does referral from an emergency department to an. alcohol treatment center reduce subsequent. emergency room visits in patients with alcohol

Simplifying the measurement of co-morbidities and their influence on chemotherapy toxicity

The Use of Psychographic Data for Chronic Condition Self Management:

length of stay in hospital, sex, marital status, discharge status and diagnostic categories. Mean age and mean length of stay were compared for the

Chiropractic Assistants Insurance Verification Training Guide

PAH in. Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management

Research. Dental Services: Use, Expenses, and Sources of Payment,

Medicare Quick Reference

Swedish RWE a goldmine?

Demonstration Study of Healthcare Utilization by Obese Patients. Joseph Vasey PhD Director, Epidemiology Quintiles Outcome May 22, 2013

Total Cost of Cancer Care by Site of Service: Physician Office vs Outpatient Hospital

White Paper. Medicare Part D Improves the Economic Well-Being of Low Income Seniors

GAO MEDICARE ADVANTAGE. Relationship between Benefit Package Designs and Plans Average Beneficiary Health Status. Report to Congressional Requesters

Risk Adjustment: Implications for Community Health Centers

Electronic Health Record (EHR) Data Analysis Capabilities

The Ohio Department of Medicaid s Methods for High Risk Care Management Program Performance Measures. SFY 2015 Final

Your Retiree Health Care Travel Guide

Improving access and reducing costs of care for overactive bladder through a multidisciplinary delivery model

Brief Research Report: Fountain House and Use of Healthcare Resources

03/20/12. Recognize the right of patients to appropriate assessment and management of pain

Evaluation of a Morphine Weaning Protocol in Pediatric Intensive Care Patients

Comparison of Discharge Functional Status Rehabilitation: Hip Fracture Repair. Trudy Mallinson, PhD, OTR/L

BACKGROUND. ADA and the European Association recently issued a consensus algorithm for management of type 2 diabetes

THE A,B,C,D S OF MEDICARE

Explanation of care coordination payments as described in Section of the PCMH provider manual

Disease Management Identifications and Stratification Health Risk Assessment Level 1: Level 2: Level 3: Stratification

Prior Authorization, Pharmacy and Health Case Management Information. Prior Authorization. Pharmacy Information. Health Case Management

ONCOLOGY MANAGEMENT. Controlling Cancer-Related. Costs in Your Population. Intelligent Value. October 2012

Controversies in the management of patients with PMF 0/1

Frequent headache is defined as headaches 15 days/month and daily. Course of Frequent/Daily Headache in the General Population and in Medical Practice

Prior Authorization, Pharmacy and Health Case Management Information. Prior Authorization. Pharmacy Information. Health Case Management

Introduction to Medication Management Systems, Inc. Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management Solutions

Retiree Considerations Medicare 101. June 26, 2012

FULL COVERAGE FOR PREVENTIVE MEDICATIONS AFTER MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION IMPACT ON RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES

Impact of Diabetes on Treatment Outcomes among Maryland Tuberculosis Cases, Tania Tang PHASE Symposium May 12, 2007

GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE (GERD)

A study to Evaluate PPI s effect on vitamin D levels. Rani Hanna M.D., M.S. PGY-3 Joseph Grisanti, MD

Psoriasis, Incidence, Quality of Life, Psoriatic Arthritis, Prevalence

Mean Duration (days) ± SD b. n = 587 n = 587

Medical Plan Comparison

Measure Information Form (MIF) #275, adapted for quality measurement in Medicare Accountable Care Organizations

Assessment of the Feasibility and Cost of Replacing In-Person Care with Acute Care Telehealth Services

Transcription:

DOES THE DOSING FREQUENCY OF PROTON PUMP INHIBITORS (PPIs) AFFECT SUBSEQUENT RESOURCE UTILIZATION AND COSTS AMONG PATIENTS DIAGNOSED WITH GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE (GERD)? Boulanger L 1, Mody R 2, Bao Y 1, Ancukiewicz V 1, Russell MW 1 1 Abt Associates Inc., Lexington, MA, USA 2 TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc., Lake Forest, IL, USA Research funding was provided by TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. Poster presentation for the 13 th annual International Society for Practical Outcomes Research: Toronto, ON, Canada. Poster presentation for the 13 th annual International Society for Practical Outcomes Research: Toronto, ON, Canada (Note: Poster requirements, 36 wide and 60 height, VERTICAL European-style presentation)

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To assess utilization and costs of healthcare services for patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) that were dispensed once (QD) vs. twice (BID) daily PPIs. METHODS: Employing Thomson s MarketScan Database, GERD patients 18+ years of age with 1+ PPI dispensed, but had no erosive esophagitis or Barrett s esophagus diagnosed during 2003-2004 were selected. The date of the first observed PPI was considered as the index date. Frequency of PPI dosing (QD vs. BID) was assessed from pharmacy claims. Differences in total and GERD-related costs by cohort for the 12-month period following the index date were assessed using multivariate regression, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics (age, gender, region, Charlson comorbidity score [CCS], pre-index diagnosis of esophageal stricture or hemorrhage [ESH], and pre-index use of PPIs). RESULTS: A total of 219,365 GERD patients on QD PPI therapy and 23,011 patients on BID PPI therapy were identified. The cohorts were similar in age, but the QD cohort had a larger proportion of males (41% vs 37%, p<0.01). Mean CCS was higher in the BID cohort (1.2 vs 1.0, p<0.01). A higher proportion of BID patients had pre-index ESH diagnosed (4% vs 3%, p<0.01) and PPI s dispensed (58% vs 47%, p<0.01). In the 12-month follow-up period, the mean number of office visits was higher among BID patients (14.5 vs 12.4, p<0.01). Unadjusted total healthcare payments were about $2,900 higher for BID patients ($11,102 vs $8,169, p<0.01), 55% of which were payments for medical services. GERD-related costs were about $750 higher for BID patients ($1,941 vs $1,187, p<0.01). On an adjusted basis, total and GERD-related payments were approximately $1,500 and $450 higher among the BID cohort. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that patients diagnosed with GERD who receive BID PPI therapy incur more total and GERD-related healthcare resource utilization and plan payments relative to those on QD therapy. 2

BACKGROUND In the US, GERD-associated symptoms affect approximately 60% of adults annually and up to 10% daily. The estimated lifetime prevalence of GERD is 25-35%. 1-5 In one analysis of managed care data, the average person with GERD had $1500-$2000 more in annual total healthcare expenditures than those without GERD. 6 There are limited data on the impact of once daily versus twice daily PPI dosing regimens on patterns of healthcare resource utilization and associated direct costs. STUDY OBJECTIVES Among GERD patients, for those prescribed once daily versus twice daily PPIs, this study: Profiled demographic and clinical characteristics Assessed patterns of total and GERD-related healthcare resource utilization Quantified associated direct total and GERD-related healthcare costs METHODS Data Source A retrospective cohort design employing administrative claims data from Thomson Medstat's MarketScan Commercial Claims & Encounters and Medicare Supplement and COB databases (July 1, 2001-December 31, 2005) were used to address the research objectives Data from patient level enrollment files, pharmacy files, and medical services files were used for the study Patient Selection & Cohort Identification Health enrollment requirement: continuous enrollment for at least 12 months prior to the index date through 12 months following the index date (i.e. study period). Patients 18+ years of age were required to have one or more medical visits with an associated diagnosis of GERD (ICD-9-CM code 530.10, 530.11, 530.12, 530.19, or 530.81) during the calendar years of 2003 and 2004. Patients also were required to have one or more pharmacy claim for a PPI (identified based on NDC) during the calendar years of 2003 and 2004 (the first observed PPI was set as the index date). 3

Exclusion criteria: patients with erosive esophagitis (ICD-9-CM diagnosis code 530.20, 530.21) or Barrett s esophagus (ICD-9-CM diagnosis code 530.85) diagnosis were excluded from the study population. Two patient cohorts were identified: the QD cohort consists of selected GERD patients who had a once-daily initial PPI dosing regimen, and the BID cohort consists of selected GERD patients who had a twice-daily initial PPI dosing regimen. Study Measures and Data Analysis Healthcare resource utilization and associated direct costs by component in the 12 months following the index date were determined. Components include inpatient services (i.e., hospitalization), outpatient services (i.e., community-based physician visits and emergency room visits), and prescription medications. Student t-tests were used to test the statistical difference between the QD and BID cohorts. Multivariate analysis technique was employed to examine the effects of initial PPI dosing regimen on total healthcare costs after accounting for baseline patient demographic and clinical characteristics RESULTS The total sample size was 242,376 patients, including 219,365 patients (90.5%) in the QD cohort and 23,011 patients (9.5%) in the BID cohort. Baseline demographics were similar between the two cohorts, although there were fewer males in the BID cohort than in the QD cohort (see Table 1). 4

Table 1: Baseline demographic characteristics, by dosing frequency Dosing frequency Characteristic Q.D. B.I.D. p-value Number of patients 219,365 23,011 Mean (SD) age 56.6 (15.0) 56.7 (14.4) 0.15 Female (%) 59.1% 62.6% <0.01 Plan types (%) <0.01 Comprehensive 32.3% 34.5% HMO 11.7% 12.4% PPO 40.9% 38.0% Other* 15.0% 15.0% Geographic region (%) <0.01 Northeast 7.7% 8.0% North Central 36.3% 40.1% South 40.5% 35.1% West 15.3% 16.6% Unknown 0.3% 0.2% * Other insurance types include: EPO, POS, and POS with capitation. In the pre-index period, patients in the BID cohort had clinical characteristics that indicated more severe GERD than patients in the QD cohort. Patients in the BID cohort also had more comorbid conditions (Table 2). Table 2: Clinical characteristics in the pre-index period, by dosing frequency Dosing frequency Characteristic Q.D. B.I.D. p-value Number of patients 219,365 23,011 Patients with esophageal stricture or hemorrhage (%) 2.6% 3.6% <0.01 Patients with endoscopy procedures (%) 18.8% 30.7% <0.01 Mean (SD) Charlson comorbidity score 1.0 (1.6) 1.2 (1.7) <0.01 Distribution of Charlson comorbidity score <0.01 0 54.2% 46.5% 1 23.7% 26.2% 2 10.9% 12.6% 3+ 11.3% 14.6% Patients with PPI treatment (%) 41.6% 52.2% <0.01 Patients with H2RA treatment (%) 3.8% 4.9% <0.01 Patients with any hospitalization (%) 16.7% 21.5% <0.01 Mean (SD) total healthcare expenditures $5,923 ($13,538) $8,290 ($17,288) <0.01 5

Patients on BID regimens had significantly higher levels of GERD-related and overall resource utilization during the post-index period. Differences were observed in percentage of patients who required hospitalization, ER visits and GERD-specific and overall medication burden (see Table 3). Table 3: Inpatient and physician resource use in the post-index period, by dosing frequency Dosing frequency Component of healthcare service Q.D. B.I.D p-value Number of patients 219,365 23,011 Hospitalization admissions: GERD-related: Percentage of patients 0.9% 1.7% <0.01 Mean (SD) length of stay 0.0 (0.6) 0.1 (0.8) <0.01 Overall: Percentage of patients 16.6% 19.6% <0.01 Mean (SD) length of stay 1.1 (6.6) 1.4 (6.1) <0.01 Patients with any ER visit (%) 18.3% 19.5% <0.01 Mean (SD) number of community based physician visits 12.4 (12.3) 14.5 (14.1) <0.01 Mean (SD) number of PPI prescriptions 1.7 (2.7) 2.1 (2.9) <0.01 Mean (SD) number of H2RA prescriptions 0.1 (0.6) 0.1 (0.6) 0.42 Mean (SD) number of total prescriptions 8.8 (6.6) 11.0 (7.8) <0.01 6

Direct treatment costs during the post-index period were significantly higher for the BID cohort relative to those in the QD cohort for inpatient services, outpatient services, pharmacy services and total and GERD-related healthcare costs (Table 4). Table 4: Annual healthcare costs for GERD patients in the post-index period, by dosing frequency Dosing frequency p-value Component of healthcare cost Q.D. B.I.D Number of patients 219,365 23,011 Mean (SD) inpatient costs: Any Condition $1,754 ($11,086) $2,437 ($13,897) <0.01 GERD-related $60 ($1,291) $143 ($1,952) <0.01 Mean (SD) outpatient costs: Any Condition $3,570 ($9,040) $4,491 ($9,277) <0.01 GERD-related $252 ($919) $337 ($1,465) <0.01 Mean (SD) total medical costs: Any Condition $5,324 ($16,273) $6,928 ($18,885) <0.01 GERD-related $311 ($1,641) $480 ($2,571) <0.01 Mean (SD) pharmacy costs: All Medications $2,845 ($3,398) $4,174 ($5,129) <0.01 PPIs $871 ($585) $1,452 ($994) <0.01 Mean (SD) total healthcare costs $8,169 ($17,140) $11,102 ($20,382) <0.01 Mean (SD) total GERD-related healthcare costs $1,187 ($1,898) $1,941 ($3,088) <0.01 In multivariate analysis, we controlled for patient demographics, clinical characteristics, prior PPI usage, and prior GERD-related expenditures. After adjusting for baseline patient characteristics, the BID cohort was associated with approximately $1,500 (p<0.01) in additional total healthcare expenditures and $450 (p<0.01) in additional GERD-related healthcare expenditures. Significant predictors for higher costs among BID patients include age, male gender, region, Charlson comorbidity score, pre-index diagnosis of esophageal stricture or hemorrhage, and pre-index use of PPIs. LIMITATIONS Retrospective study design Without access to patients actual medical records, the study could not sufficiently assess the severity of GERD conditions in study patients 7

The study did not have access to patients history of over-the-counter medication utilization CONCLUSION Patients prescribed once-daily PPIs had significantly lower levels of resource utilization and incurred lower healthcare costs in both the pre-index and post-index periods compared to those dispensed twice-daily PPIs. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline, the cost for the twice-daily PPI dosing regimen was $1,500 (p<0.01) higher for all healthcare expenditures and $450 (p<0.01) higher for GERD-related expenditures compared to once-daily PPIs. 8

REFERENCES 1) American College of Gastroenterology. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): a consumer health guide. Available at http://www.acg.gi.org/. Accessed July, 2007. 2) Shaheen N, Provenzale D. The epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Med Sci 2003; 326(5):264-273. 3) Locke GR, III, Talley NJ, Fett SL, Zinsmeister AR, Melton LJ, III. Prevalence and clinical spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gastroenterology 1997; 112(5):1448-1456. 4) Heartburn across America. Gallup Organization, editor. 1988. The Gallup Organization. A Gallup Organization National Survey. 5) Nebel OT, Fornes MF, Castell DO. Symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux: incidence and precipitating factors. Am J Dig Dis 1976; 21(11):953-956. 6) Bloom BS, Jayadevappa R, Wahl P, Cacciamanni J. Time trends in cost of caring for people with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96(8 Suppl):S64-S69. 9