Journal of medical economics · 2024
All-cause claims analysis of the LATERA absorbable nasal implant vs surgical repair in patients with nasal valve collapse.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vo Ricky, Barhoush Yazid, Batchu Lakshmi, Adams Shayna, Setzen Gavin
Аннотация
AIMS: To compare all-cause claims associated with the LATERA Absorbable Nasal Implant and surgical repair of nasal vestibular stenosis in patients with nasal valve collapse.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized data from STATinMED RWD Insights. A defined set of HCPCS, ICD-10-CM and CPT codes were used to identify patients with ≥1 claim for a LATERA procedure, and patients with ≥1 claim for surgical repair between June 1, 2015- March 31, 2023. Patients with continuous capture for at least 12 months before and at least 6 months after the index date were selected. The index date was defined as earliest date of encounter for a LATERA or surgical repair procedure. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to ensure balance between cohorts. Descriptive analyses were provided for all claims data using standard summary statistics. All-cause claims were assessed during the baseline, index date, and follow-up period. Chi-squared tests and independent sample t-tests were used to assess differences in cohorts for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.
RESULTS: The study population included 5,032 LATERA patients and 26,553 surgical repair patients. During the baseline and follow-up periods, the matched cohorts exhibited similar all-cause claims. On the index date, LATERA patients incurred lower claims vs. surgical repair, likely due to LATERA's ability to be implanted in the physician office setting. LATERA patients and surgical repair patients mean (SD) total costs were $9,612 [$14,930] vs $11,846 [$17,037] (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the LATERA Absorbable Nasal Implant is a potentially cost saving option for payers on the index date compared to traditional surgical repair in patients with nasal valve collapse due to the ability to be performed in the office. All-cause claims were similar in the baseline and follow-up periods. When performed with concomitant procedures, all-cause claims during follow-up were similar between groups.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized data from STATinMED RWD Insights. A defined set of HCPCS, ICD-10-CM and CPT codes were used to identify patients with ≥1 claim for a LATERA procedure, and patients with ≥1 claim for surgical repair between June 1, 2015- March 31, 2023. Patients with continuous capture for at least 12 months before and at least 6 months after the index date were selected. The index date was defined as earliest date of encounter for a LATERA or surgical repair procedure. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to ensure balance between cohorts. Descriptive analyses were provided for all claims data using standard summary statistics. All-cause claims were assessed during the baseline, index date, and follow-up period. Chi-squared tests and independent sample t-tests were used to assess differences in cohorts for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.
RESULTS: The study population included 5,032 LATERA patients and 26,553 surgical repair patients. During the baseline and follow-up periods, the matched cohorts exhibited similar all-cause claims. On the index date, LATERA patients incurred lower claims vs. surgical repair, likely due to LATERA's ability to be implanted in the physician office setting. LATERA patients and surgical repair patients mean (SD) total costs were $9,612 [$14,930] vs $11,846 [$17,037] (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the LATERA Absorbable Nasal Implant is a potentially cost saving option for payers on the index date compared to traditional surgical repair in patients with nasal valve collapse due to the ability to be performed in the office. All-cause claims were similar in the baseline and follow-up periods. When performed with concomitant procedures, all-cause claims during follow-up were similar between groups.