Registry-based trials: a potential model for cost savings?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background/aims
Registry-based trials have emerged as a potentially cost-saving study methodology. Early estimates of cost savings, however, conflated the benefits associated with registry utilisation and those associated with other aspects of pragmatic trial designs, which might not all be as broadly applicable. In this study, we sought to build a practical tool that investigators could use across disciplines to estimate the ranges of potential cost differences associated with implementing registry-based trials versus standard clinical trials.Methods
We built simulation Markov models to compare unique costs associated with data acquisition, cleaning, and linkage under a registry-based trial design versus a standard clinical trial. We conducted one-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, varying study characteristics over broad ranges, to determine thresholds at which investigators might optimally select each trial design.Results
Registry-based trials were more cost effective than standard clinical trials 98.6% of the time. Data-related cost savings ranged from $4300 to $600,000 with variation in study characteristics. Cost differences were most reactive to the number of patients in a study, the number of data elements per patient available in a registry, and the speed with which research coordinators could manually abstract data. Registry incorporation resulted in cost savings when as few as 3768 independent data elements were available and when manual data abstraction took as little as 3.4 seconds per data field.Conclusions
Registries offer important resources for investigators. When available, their broad incorporation may help the scientific community reduce the costs of clinical investigation. We offer here a practical tool for investigators to assess potential costs savings.
SUBMITTER: Anderson BR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7682727 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and aimsNutritional support improves clinical outcomes during hospitalisation as well as after discharge. Recently, a systematic review of 27 randomised, controlled trials showed that nutritional support was associated with lower rates of hospital readmissions and improved survival. In the present economic modelling study, we sought to determine whether in-hospital nutritional support would also return economic benefits.MethodsThe current economic model applied cost estimates to the outcome results from our recent systematic review of hospitalised patients. In the underlying meta-analysis, a total of 27 trials (n=6803 patients) were included. To calculate the economic impact of nutritional support, a Markov model was developed using transitions between relevant health states. Costs were estimated accounting for length of stay in a general hospital ward, hospital-acquired infections, readmissions and nutritional support. Six-month mortality was also considered. The estimated daily per-patient cost for in-hospital nutrition was US$6.23.ResultsOverall costs of care within the model timeframe of 6 months averaged US$63 227 per patient in the intervention group versus US$66 045 in the control group, which corresponds to per patient cost savings of US$2818. These cost savings were mainly due to reduced infection rate and shorter lengths of stay. We also calculated the costs to prevent a hospital-acquired infection and a non-elective readmission, that is, US$820 and US$733, respectively. The incremental cost per life-day gained was -US$1149 with 2.53 additional days. The sensitivity analyses for cost per quality-adjusted life day provided support for the original findings.ConclusionsFor medical inpatients who are malnourished or at nutritional risk, our findings showed that in-hospital nutritional support is a cost-effective way to reduce risk for readmissions, lower the frequency of hospital-associated infections, and improve survival rates.
| S-EPMC8273448 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: To analyse the market shares of biosimilars in Slovakia and to calculate the potential cost-savings from the use of biosimilars in Slovakia based on two different data sources. Methods: National reimbursement lists from the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia were used for analyzing the availability of biosimilars with public funding. In addition, the reimbursement dossiers of biosimilars, the justifications of reimbursement decisions by the Slovak Ministry of Health, and final reimbursement decrees, which are published on the webpage of the Slovak Ministry of Health, were utilized for this study. Reimbursement decisions regarding biosimilars by the Slovak Ministry of Health from 2006 to August 2019 were considered and the detailed utilization of biosimilars in 2018 was analyzed based on data from the State Institute for Drug Control. The study was validated based on data from the Slovak National Health Information Center. Results: Fifty four biosimilars were approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in August 2019. Of the total group of licensed biosimilars on the market, 29 biosimilars (54%) were available in the Czech Republic, 28 biosimilars (52%) were available in Poland, and 27 biosimilars (50%) were available in Hungary and 24 biosimilars (44%) were available in Slovakia. Our analysis, based on the data provided by distributors of medicinal products to the State Institute for Drug Control, revealed that the health fund in Slovakia could have saved 35 to 50 million euros per year if biosimilars with marketing authorisations had been available on the Slovak market. The calculations assumed a 25-35% price decrease against the original biological medical products, and that there would be no increase in the utilization of biosimilars in Slovakia. Conclusions: To achieve significant improvement in patient access to biosimilars in Slovakia, a top-down approach establishing targets and quotas for the procurement of biosimilars should be applied.
| S-EPMC7472099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Consumption of dietary pulses, including beans, peas and lentils, is recommended by health authorities across jurisdictions for their nutritional value and effectiveness in helping to prevent and manage major diet-related illnesses of significant socioeconomic burden. The aim of this study was to estimate the potential annual healthcare and societal cost savings relevant to rates of reduction in complications from type 2 diabetes (T2D) and incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) following a low glycemic index (GI) or high fiber diet that includes pulses, or 100 g/day pulse intake in Canada, respectively. A four-step cost-of-illness analysis was conducted to: (1) estimate the proportions of individuals who are likely to consume pulses; (2) evaluate the reductions in established risk factors for T2D and CVD; (3) assess the percent reduction in incidences or complications of the diseases of interest; and (4) calculate the potential annual savings in relevant healthcare and related costs. A low GI or high fiber diet that includes pulses and 100 g/day pulse intake were shown to potentially yield Can$6.2 (95% CI $2.6-$9.9) to Can$62.4 (95% CI $26-$98.8) and Can$31.6 (95% CI $11.1-$52) to Can$315.5 (95% CI $110.6-$520.4) million in savings on annual healthcare and related costs of T2D and CVD, respectively. Specific provincial/territorial analyses suggested annual T2D and CVD related cost savings that ranged from up to Can$0.2 million in some provinces to up to Can$135 million in others. In conclusion, with regular consumption of pulse crops, there is a potential opportunity to facilitate T2D and CVD related socioeconomic cost savings that could be applied to Canadian healthcare or re-assigned to other priority domains. Whether these potential cost savings will be offset by other healthcare costs associated with longevity and diseases of the elderly is to be investigated over the long term.
| S-EPMC5537906 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundInsulin pen injectors ("pens") are intended to facilitate a patient's self-administration of insulin and can be used in hospitalized patients as a learning opportunity. Unnecessary or duplicate dispensation of insulin pens is associated with increased healthcare costs.MethodsInpatient dispensation of insulin pens in a 240-bed community hospital between July 2018 and July 2019 was analyzed. We calculated the percentage of insulin pens unnecessarily dispensed for patients who had the same type of insulin pen assigned. The estimated cost of insulin pen waste was calculated. A pharmacist-led task force group implemented hospital-wide awareness and collaborated with hospital leadership to define goals and interventions.Results9516 insulin pens were dispensed to 3121 patients. Of the pens dispensed, 6451 (68%) were insulin aspart and 3065 (32%) were glargine. Among patients on insulin aspart, an average of 2.2 aspart pens was dispensed per patient, but only an estimated 1.2 pens/patient were deemed necessary. Similarly, for inpatients prescribed glargine, an average of 2.1 pens/patient was dispensed, but only 1.3 pens/patient were necessary. A number of gaps were identified and interventions were undertaken to reduce insulin pen waste, which resulted in a significant decrease in both aspart (p = 0.0002) and glargine (p = 0.0005) pens/patient over time. Reductions in pen waste resulted in an estimated cost savings of $66 261 per year.ConclusionsIn a community hospital setting, identification of causes leading to unnecessary insulin dispensation and implementation of hospital-wide staff education led to change in insulin pen dispensation practice. These changes translated into considerable cost savings and facilitated diabetes self-management education.
| S-EPMC8258519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundForty-five percent of births in the United States are unintended, and the costs of unintended pregnancy and birth are substantial. Clinical and policy interventions that increase access to the most effective reversible contraceptive methods (intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants) have potential to generate significant cost savings. Evidence of cost savings for these interventions is needed.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-savings analysis of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project, which provided counseling and no-cost contraception, to demonstrate the value of investment in enhanced contraceptive care to the Missouri Medicaid program.Study designThe Contraceptive CHOICE Project was a prospective cohort study of 9256 reproductive-age women who were enrolled between 2007 and 2011. Study follow-up was completed October 2013. This analysis includes 5061 Contraceptive CHOICE Project participants who were current Missouri Medicaid beneficiaries or were uninsured and reported household incomes <201% of the federal poverty line. We created a simulated comparison group of women who were receiving care through the Missouri Title X program and modeled the contraception and pregnancy outcomes that would have occurred in the absence of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Data about contraceptive use for the comparison group (N=5061) were obtained from the Missouri Title X program and adjusted based on age, race, ethnicity, and income. To make an accurate comparison that would account for the difference in the 2 populations, we used our simulation model to estimate total Contraceptive CHOICE Project costs and total comparison group costs. We reported all costs in 2013 dollars to account for inflation.ResultsAmong the Contraceptive CHOICE Project participants who were included, the uptake of intrauterine devices and implants was 76.1% compared with 4.8% among the comparison group. The estimated contraceptive cost for the simulated Contraceptive CHOICE Project group was $4.0 million vs $2.3 million for the comparison group. The estimated numbers of unintended pregnancies and births averted among the simulated Contraceptive CHOICE Project group compared with the comparison group were 927 and 483, respectively, which represented a savings in pregnancy and maternity care of $6.7 million. We estimated that the total cost savings for the state of Missouri attributable to the Contraceptive CHOICE Project was $5.0 million (40.7%) over the project duration.ConclusionA program providing counseling and no-cost contraception yields substantial cost savings because of the increased uptake of highly effective contraception and consequent averted unintended pregnancy and birth.
| S-EPMC6741429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent patent losses for antiretroviral drugs (ARV) have led to the debate of cost-saving through the replacement of patented drugs with generic drugs. The split of recommended single-tablet regimens (STR) into their single substance partners is one of the considerations mentioned in said debate. Particularly, generic tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) is expected to hold untapped cost-saving potential, which may curb increasing overall expenditures for combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) within the statutory health insurance (SHI) of Germany.MethodsData of ARV reimbursed by the SHI were used to describe the trends of defined daily doses (DDD) as well as the revenue within the German ARV market. They were also used to determine the cost-savings of moving to generic drugs. The time period observed was between January 2017 and June 2019. The potential cost-savings were determined with following assumption in mind: the maximum possible use of generic ARV, including 1) the split of STR and replacing all substance partners with generic ones, and 2) replacing patented tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (TAF/FTC) with generic TDF/FTC.ResultsThroughout the observation period, the DDD of generic ARV increased nearly five-fold while their revenue increased more than four-fold. Total cost-saving showed a sharp increase over the same period, with generic TDF/FTC accounting for a share of around 70%. The largest potential cost-saving could have been achieved through replacing patented TAF/FTC with generic TDF/FTC, peaking at nearly 10% of total revenue, but showing decreasing trends in general.ConclusionThe progressive distribution of generic ARV ensured increasing cost-savings, but consequently curbed the potential cost-savings. Unique price reductions of generic TDF/FTC have played a pivotal role for these effects. In any case, substituting with generic ARV should not fail to adhere to the treatment guidelines and continue to consider the medical requirements for the treatment.
| S-EPMC8756633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The energetic economy of running benefits from tendon and other tissues that store and return elastic energy, thus saving muscles from costly mechanical work. The classic "Spring-mass" computational model successfully explains the forces, displacements and mechanical power of running, as the outcome of dynamical interactions between the body center of mass and a purely elastic spring for the leg. However, the Spring-mass model does not include active muscles and cannot explain the metabolic energy cost of running, whether on level ground or on a slope. Here we add explicit actuation and dissipation to the Spring-mass model, and show how they explain substantial active (and thus costly) work during human running, and much of the associated energetic cost. Dissipation is modeled as modest energy losses (5% of total mechanical energy for running at 3 m s-1) from hysteresis and foot-ground collisions, that must be restored by active work each step. Even with substantial elastic energy return (59% of positive work, comparable to empirical observations), the active work could account for most of the metabolic cost of human running (about 68%, assuming human-like muscle efficiency). We also introduce a previously unappreciated energetic cost for rapid production of force, that helps explain the relatively smooth ground reaction forces of running, and why muscles might also actively perform negative work. With both work and rapid force costs, the model reproduces the energetics of human running at a range of speeds on level ground and on slopes. Although elastic return is key to energy savings, there are still losses that require restorative muscle work, which can cost substantial energy during running.
| S-EPMC8651147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the cost savings associated with a pedometer-based, web-mediated physical activity intervention in a cohort of US veterans with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Study designEconomic analysis.MethodsWe constructed a decision tree from the health care system perspective incorporating adjusted relative risk of a pedometer-based, web-mediated intervention for COPD-related acute exacerbations, acute exacerbation-related costs (ie, emergency department visits and hospitalizations), and intervention-related costs. Total COPD-related costs were estimated per patient across 12 months. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate uncertainty in the model findings.ResultsIn the deterministic (base case) model, the model estimated costs to be $4236 per participant who used the pedometer-based, web-mediated intervention compared with $7913 per participant in the control group (estimated $3677 saved in 1 year compared with the control group). The model findings were robust to probabilistic sensitivity analysis, with a difference in mean costs of $4582 (95% probability interval, $4084-$5080; P < .001). Cost savings in the model were driven by the adjusted relative risk of the web-based intervention, probability of a COPD-related acute exacerbation, rate of hospitalization, probability of hospitalization, and cost of hospitalization.ConclusionsA pedometer-based, web-mediated physical activity intervention yielded substantial cost savings. Increased implementation of the intervention could markedly reduce the economic burden of COPD for payers and patients.
| S-EPMC10760514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the longitudinal effects of medication nonadherence (MNA) on key costs and estimate potential savings from increased adherence using a novel methodology that accounts for shared correlation among cost categories.Research design and methodsVeterans with type 2 diabetes (740,195) were followed from January 2002 until death, loss to follow-up, or December 2006. A novel multivariate, generalized, linear, mixed modeling approach was used to assess the differential effect of MNA, defined as medication possession ratio (MPR) ?0.8 on healthcare costs. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess potential cost savings at different MNA levels using the Consumer Price Index to adjust estimates to 2012 dollar value.ResultsMean MPR for the full sample over 5 years was 0.78, with a mean of 0.93 for the adherent group and 0.58 for the MNA group. In fully adjusted models, all annual cost categories increased ?3% per year (P = 0.001) during the 5-year study time period. MNA was associated with a 37% lower pharmacy cost, 7% lower outpatient cost, and 41% higher inpatient cost. Based on sensitivity analyses, improving adherence in the MNA group would result in annual estimated cost savings ranging from ?$661 million (MPR <0.6 vs. ?0.6) to ?$1.16 billion (MPR <1 vs. 1). Maximal incremental annual savings would occur by raising MPR from <0.8 to ?0.8 ($204,530,778) among MNA subjects.ConclusionsAggressive strategies and policies are needed to achieve optimal medication adherence in diabetes. Such approaches may further the so-called "triple aim" of achieving better health, better quality care, and lower cost.
| S-EPMC3507586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: All clinical practice guidelines recommend thiazides as a first-choice drug for the management of uncomplicated hypertension. Thiazides are also the lowest priced antihypertensive drugs. Despite this, the use of thiazides is much lower than that of other drug-classes. We wanted to estimate the potential for savings if thiazides were used as the first choice drug for the management of uncomplicated hypertension. METHODS: For six countries (Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the UK and the US) we estimated the number of people that are being treated for hypertension, and the proportion of them that are suitable candidates for thiazide-therapy. By comparing this estimate with thiazide prescribing, we calculated the number of people that could switch from more expensive medication to thiazides. This enabled us to estimate the potential drug-cost savings. The analysis was based on findings from epidemiological studies and drug trials, and data on sales and prescribing provided by IMS for the year 2000. RESULTS: For Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the UK and the US the estimated potential annual savings were US13.8 million dollars, US37.4 million dollars, US72.2 million dollars, US10.7 million dollars, US119.7 million dollars and US433.6 million dollars, respectively.
| S-EPMC201005 | biostudies-literature