Bernardo Marializa, Crawford Paul, Hertel Joachim, Sholer Chris, Xu Xiao, Goss Thomas, Kewalramani Reshma, Globe Denise
Southwest Houston Research, 8323 Southwest Fwy., Houston, TX 77074, USA.
J Manag Care Pharm. 2006 Nov-Dec;12(9):714-25. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2006.12.9.714.
There is an epidemic of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and a high prevalence of anemia (47%) observed in CKD patients. Little is known about the cost in physician office resources of routine erythropoiesis-stimulating protein (ESP) administration to treat patients with nondialysis CKD.
The objectives of this research were (1) to explore the patterns of care in physician offices where nondialysis CKD patients receive routine ESP injections, (2) to examine differences in the monthly resources and related costs incurred by physician offices in treating patients receiving either weekly (QW) or monthly (QM) ESP regimens, and (3) to identify opportunities to minimize the burden of CKD treatment on physician offices.
An observational, cross-sectional time and motion assessment was performed in 10 community-based outpatient nephrology practices (5 QW and 5 QM practices); each practice had 40 patients on routine ESP therapy for nondialysis CKD. Three observers trained in health care research documented injection-related tasks and time associated with 91 ESP injection procedures (47 QW and 44 QM) from patients. arrival to and departure from the physician office, office personnel follow-up on billing and documentation, and injection-related staff time. Monthly injection times for QM were calculated by summing the time required to perform the tasks associated with administering a single injection of ESP to subjects, as documented by observers. Total monthly per-patient medical practice costs for providing QM ESP injections were calculated, including labor costs (calculated by applying average wage rates of practice staff to time observed for the specific activities performed) and supply costs (based on average list prices found in medical supply catalogs). Monthly injection times and costs for the QW regimen were calculated by summing the same list of activities as for the QM regimen and multiplying by 4.3 (4.3 weeks per month). Nephrology practice personnel completed a questionnaire summarizing practice characteristics and estimated the time required for some of the injection-related activities. The time and cost associated with each task were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics (i.e., Fisher.s exact test and t test).
On average, patients spent 21 minutes in the clinic for a routine injection visit (QW: 17 minutes, QM: 25 minutes; P=0.053), during which 11 minutes (52%) were spent interacting with clinic staff (QW: 8.9 minutes, QM: 13.4 minutes; P=0.005). In the time spent interacting with staff, 3 minutes (QW: 2.9 minutes, QM: 3.6 minutes; P=0.065) were for dose administration and 8 minutes (QW: 5.3 minutes, QM: 9.8 minutes; P=0.011) were for staff providing various services to the patients, including registering patients on arrival, examining patients (vital signs, weight, blood work), consulting with patients, and scheduling patients. next visits. Each month, clinic staff spent a total visit average of 38 minutes providing anemia-related treatment for each QW injection patient, compared with 13 minutes for each QM injection patient (P <0.001). After patients. departure, clinic staff spent additional time (not quantified) on billing, filing claims, and other administrative responsibilities most of which could not be observed during our 1-day observation. The average total monthly practice cost of providing ESP therapy to a QW patient (17.00 dollars [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.00-27.13]) was more than double that for a QM patient (6.78 dollars [95% CI, 5.34-9.12]); (P=0.004). Differences in visit-related labor costs (QW: 8.34 dollars, QM: 3.43 dollars; P=0.108) and injection supply costs (QW: 4.39 dollars, QM: 1.67 dollars; P <0.001) accounted for the largest portions of the total monthly cost differential between the treatment regimens. QM dosing would require, on average, 83 hours less staff time and 2,044 dollars less estimated cost treating 200 patients per month compared with weekly administration per clinic.
Administering routine ESP injections to nondialysis CKD patients for anemia using a QM regimen results in substantial time and cost savings compared with a QW therapy regimen. Managing patients on less frequent ESP dosing schedules may alleviate medical practice burden by reducing the staff time and supplies related to providing injections in the office.
慢性肾脏病(CKD)呈流行态势,且CKD患者中贫血的患病率很高(47%)。对于非透析CKD患者常规使用促红细胞生成蛋白(ESP)治疗的医生办公室资源成本,人们了解甚少。
本研究的目的是:(1)探究非透析CKD患者接受常规ESP注射的医生办公室的护理模式;(2)检查医生办公室治疗接受每周(QW)或每月(QM)ESP治疗方案患者时每月资源及相关成本的差异;(3)确定将CKD治疗对医生办公室的负担降至最低的机会。
在10个社区门诊肾病科(5个QW科室和5个QM科室)进行了一项观察性横断面时间与动作评估;每个科室有40例接受非透析CKD常规ESP治疗的患者。3名接受过医疗保健研究培训的观察员记录了与91次ESP注射程序(47次QW和44次QM)相关的注射任务和时间,从患者到达和离开医生办公室、办公室人员进行计费和记录跟进以及与注射相关的工作人员时间。QM的每月注射时间通过将观察员记录的对受试者单次注射ESP相关任务所需时间相加得出。计算提供QM ESP注射的每位患者每月的医疗实践总成本,包括劳动力成本(通过将科室工作人员的平均工资率应用于观察到的特定活动时间来计算)和供应成本(基于医疗用品目录中的平均标价)。QW治疗方案的每月注射时间和成本通过将与QM治疗方案相同的活动列表相加并乘以4.3(每月4.3周)得出。肾病科工作人员完成了一份总结科室特征的问卷,并估计了一些与注射相关活动所需的时间。使用描述性和比较性统计分析(即Fisher精确检验和t检验)分析与每项任务相关的时间和成本。
平均而言,患者进行一次常规注射就诊在诊所花费21分钟(QW:17分钟,QM:25分钟;P = 0.053),在此期间,11分钟(52%)用于与诊所工作人员互动(QW:8.9分钟,QM:13.4分钟;P = 0.005)。在与工作人员互动所花费的时间中,3分钟(QW:2.9分钟,QM:3.6分钟;P = 0.065)用于给药,8分钟(QW:5.3分钟,QM:9.8分钟;P = 0.011)用于工作人员为患者提供各种服务,包括患者到达时登记、检查患者(生命体征、体重、血液检查)、与患者咨询以及安排患者下次就诊。每月,诊所工作人员为每位QW注射患者提供贫血相关治疗平均总共花费38分钟,而每位QM注射患者花费13分钟(P < 0.001)。患者离开后,诊所工作人员在计费、提交索赔和其他行政职责上花费了额外时间(未量化),其中大部分在我们为期1天的观察期间无法观察到。为QW患者提供ESP治疗的每月平均总科室成本(17.00美元[95%置信区间(CI),13.00 - 27.13])是QM患者(6.78美元[95%CI,5.34 - 9.12])的两倍多;(P = 0.004)。就诊相关劳动力成本(QW:8.34美元,QM:3.43美元;P = 0.108)和注射供应成本(QW:4.39美元,QM:1.67美元;P < 0.001)的差异在治疗方案每月总成本差异中占最大部分。与每个科室每周给药相比,QM给药每月治疗200例患者平均所需工作人员时间少83小时,估计成本少2044美元。
与QW治疗方案相比,使用QM方案为非透析CKD患者贫血进行常规ESP注射可节省大量时间和成本。采用ESP给药频率较低的方案管理患者,可通过减少办公室注射相关的工作人员时间和用品来减轻医疗实践负担。