Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Denver; Adult and Child Consortium for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Denver.
Adult and Child Consortium for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Denver.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Oct;223(4):562.e1-562.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.051. Epub 2020 Mar 13.
To determine the costs and reimbursement associated with running a vaccine program in 5 obstetrics/gynecology practices in Colorado that had participated in a 3-year randomized, controlled trial focused on increasing vaccination in this setting.
This was a secondary analysis on costs from 5 clinics participating in a cluster-randomized controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of a multimodal intervention to improve vaccination rates in outpatient obstetrics/gynecology clinics in central Colorado. The intervention included designation of an immunization champion within the practice, purchasing recommended vaccines for the practice, guidance on storage and management, implementing practices for routine identification of eligible patients for vaccination using the medical record, implementation of standing orders for vaccination, and vaccine administration to patients. Data on costs were gathered from office invoices, claims data, surveys and in-person observations during the course of the trial. These data incorporated supply and personnel costs for administering vaccines to individual patients that were derived from a combination of time-motion studies of staff and provider clinical activity, and practice reports, as well as costs related to maintaining the vaccination program at the practice level, which were derived from practice reports and invoices. Cost data for personnel time during visits in which vaccination was assessed and/or discussed, but no vaccine was given to the patient were also included in the main analysis. Data on practice revenue were derived from practice reimbursement records. All costs were described in 2014 dollars. The primary analysis was the proportion of costs for the program that were reimbursed, aggregated over all years of the study and combining all vaccines and practices, separated by obstetrics vs gynecology patients.
Collectively the 5 clinics served >40,000 patient during the study period and served a population that was 16% Medicaid. Over the 3-year observation period, there were 6573 vaccination claims made collectively by the practices (4657 for obstetric patients, 1916 for gynecology patients). The most expensive component of the program was the material costs of the vaccines themselves, which ranged from a low of $9.67 for influenza vaccines, to a high of $141.40 for human papillomavirus vaccine. Staff costs for assessing and delivering vaccines during patient visits were minimal ($0.09-$1.24 per patient visit depending on the practice and whether an obstetrics or gynecology visit was being assessed) compared with staff costs for maintaining the program at a practice level (ie, assessing inventory, ordering and stocking vaccines; $0.89-$105.89 per vaccine dose given). When assessing all costs compared with all reimbursement, we found that vaccines for obstetrics patients were reimbursed at 159% of the costs over the study period, and for gynecology patients at 97% of the costs. Overall, the vaccination program was financially favorable across the practices, averaging 125% reimbursement of costs across the three study years.
Providing routine vaccines to patients in the ambulatory obstetrics/gynecology setting is generally not financially prohibitive for practices, and may even be financially beneficial, though there is variability between practices that can affect the overall reimbursement margin.
确定在科罗拉多州的 5 家妇产科诊所中运行疫苗项目的相关成本和报销情况,这些诊所参与了一项为期 3 年的随机对照试验,旨在提高该环境下的疫苗接种率。
这是对参与一项多模式干预措施以提高科罗拉多州中部妇产科门诊疫苗接种率的 5 家诊所的成本进行的二次分析。该干预措施包括在实践中指定一名免疫接种冠军,为实践购买推荐的疫苗,提供疫苗储存和管理方面的指导,实施使用医疗记录常规确定有资格接种疫苗的患者的做法,实施疫苗接种的常规医嘱,以及为患者接种疫苗。成本数据来自于办公发票、索赔数据、调查和试验过程中的现场观察。这些数据结合了对个别患者进行疫苗接种的供应和人员成本,这些成本来自于对员工时间的时间运动研究和提供者的临床活动,以及实践报告,以及与维持实践水平的疫苗接种计划相关的成本,这些成本来自于实践报告和发票。在对患者进行疫苗接种评估和/或讨论但未给患者接种疫苗的就诊期间,还包括人员时间的成本数据。实践收入数据来源于实践报销记录。所有成本均以 2014 年美元表示。主要分析是研究期间所有年份汇总的计划成本占比,以及所有疫苗和实践的组合,按妇产科患者和妇科患者分开。
在研究期间,这 5 家诊所总共为超过 40000 名患者提供服务,服务人群中有 16%的人享受医疗补助。在 3 年的观察期间,这些实践共提出了 6573 项疫苗接种索赔(4657 项为产科患者,1916 项为妇科患者)。该计划中最昂贵的部分是疫苗本身的材料成本,从流感疫苗的 9.67 美元到人乳头瘤病毒疫苗的 141.40 美元不等。与维持实践水平的疫苗接种计划的员工成本(即评估库存、订购和储存疫苗)相比,在患者就诊期间评估和提供疫苗的员工成本微不足道(每个患者就诊费用为 0.09-1.24 美元,具体取决于实践以及评估的是产科还是妇科就诊)($0.89-105.89 每支疫苗剂量)。在评估所有成本与所有报销相比时,我们发现产科患者的疫苗在研究期间的报销比例为成本的 159%,妇科患者的报销比例为成本的 97%。总体而言,在所有实践中,疫苗接种计划在财务上是有利的,在三个研究年度中平均报销成本的 125%。
在妇产科门诊环境中为患者提供常规疫苗接种通常不会对实践造成经济上的限制,甚至可能在经济上有利,尽管实践之间存在差异会影响整体报销幅度。