Understanding Data and Opportunities Focused on Value: A Single-Center Experience in Headache Care.

IF 2.3 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurology. Clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200347
Andrew M Wilson, Martha Sylvia, Anelyssa D'Abreu, Connor Hansen, Maha Salah-Ud-Din, Aiesha Ahmed
{"title":"Understanding Data and Opportunities Focused on Value: A Single-Center Experience in Headache Care.","authors":"Andrew M Wilson, Martha Sylvia, Anelyssa D'Abreu, Connor Hansen, Maha Salah-Ud-Din, Aiesha Ahmed","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Headache syndromes are highly prevalent, disabling, and costly. Our goals were to (1) describe headache care delivery and costs in a system and (2) identify opportunities for the system to collect, organize, or analyze health care data to facilitate value-based headache care delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a descriptive, retrospective cohort study using data from a large integrated health system (July 2018-July 2021). We assigned individuals into a reference (REF) or headache group based on headache-related ICD diagnoses. The primary exposure variable, applied to the headache group, was the headache specialty seen most after the incident headache diagnosis: primary care (PC), neurology (NEU), or headache subspecialist (HS). Outcomes of interest were per member per month all-cause costs, per episode costs, all-cause utilization, and headache utilization. Variables included age, sex, insurance contract, and the Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) concurrent risk score. We calculated univariate statistics for clinical indicators and outcomes for each group. For outcome variables, we also report these statistics after adjustment for ACG risk score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 22,700 (14%) individuals in the headache groups and 138,818 (86%) individuals in the reference group (REF). Within the headache groups, 84% received care from PC, 14% from NEU, and 2% from HS. The average ACG risk scores increased across exposure groups. In both unadjusted and after risk adjustment analyses, total cost of care (TCOC) was highest in NEU and HS, and the largest drivers of TCOC were outpatient facility costs, followed by inpatient facility costs. HS had the highest pharmacy and professional costs. After risk adjustment, all-cause inpatient admissions and headache-related ED visits were roughly similar, although there was increasing use of outpatient PC and NEU visits across exposure groups.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Individuals seen by a NEU or HS had higher medical morbidity, higher health care utilization, and higher costs than those who receive care from PC. Outcome data were either not available or not structured to determine the value of neurologic expertise in headache care or within a particular headache care pathway. To clarify neurology's value in primary headache disorders, we encourage health system leaders to adopt an economic evaluation framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":"15 1","pages":"e200347"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11464221/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Headache syndromes are highly prevalent, disabling, and costly. Our goals were to (1) describe headache care delivery and costs in a system and (2) identify opportunities for the system to collect, organize, or analyze health care data to facilitate value-based headache care delivery.

Methods: We performed a descriptive, retrospective cohort study using data from a large integrated health system (July 2018-July 2021). We assigned individuals into a reference (REF) or headache group based on headache-related ICD diagnoses. The primary exposure variable, applied to the headache group, was the headache specialty seen most after the incident headache diagnosis: primary care (PC), neurology (NEU), or headache subspecialist (HS). Outcomes of interest were per member per month all-cause costs, per episode costs, all-cause utilization, and headache utilization. Variables included age, sex, insurance contract, and the Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) concurrent risk score. We calculated univariate statistics for clinical indicators and outcomes for each group. For outcome variables, we also report these statistics after adjustment for ACG risk score.

Results: We identified 22,700 (14%) individuals in the headache groups and 138,818 (86%) individuals in the reference group (REF). Within the headache groups, 84% received care from PC, 14% from NEU, and 2% from HS. The average ACG risk scores increased across exposure groups. In both unadjusted and after risk adjustment analyses, total cost of care (TCOC) was highest in NEU and HS, and the largest drivers of TCOC were outpatient facility costs, followed by inpatient facility costs. HS had the highest pharmacy and professional costs. After risk adjustment, all-cause inpatient admissions and headache-related ED visits were roughly similar, although there was increasing use of outpatient PC and NEU visits across exposure groups.

Discussion: Individuals seen by a NEU or HS had higher medical morbidity, higher health care utilization, and higher costs than those who receive care from PC. Outcome data were either not available or not structured to determine the value of neurologic expertise in headache care or within a particular headache care pathway. To clarify neurology's value in primary headache disorders, we encourage health system leaders to adopt an economic evaluation framework.

了解数据,把握机遇,注重价值:头痛治疗的单中心经验。
背景和目的:头痛综合征发病率高、致残率高、费用高。我们的目标是:(1)描述一个系统中的头痛医疗服务和成本;(2)确定该系统收集、组织或分析医疗数据的机会,以促进基于价值的头痛医疗服务:我们使用一个大型综合医疗系统的数据(2018 年 7 月至 2021 年 7 月)进行了一项描述性、回顾性队列研究。我们根据头痛相关的 ICD 诊断,将个人分配到参考组(REF)或头痛组。头痛组的主要暴露变量是头痛事件诊断后就诊最多的头痛专科:初级保健(PC)、神经内科(NEU)或头痛亚专科(HS)。相关结果包括每个会员每月的全因成本、每次发病的成本、全因利用率和头痛利用率。变量包括年龄、性别、保险合同和调整后临床组(ACG)并发风险评分。我们计算了各组临床指标和结果的单变量统计。对于结果变量,我们还报告了根据 ACG 风险评分进行调整后的统计结果:我们发现头痛组中有 22,700 人(14%),参照组中有 138,818 人(86%)。在头痛组中,84% 的人接受了 PC 的治疗,14% 的人接受了东北大学的治疗,2% 的人接受了 HS 的治疗。各暴露组的 ACG 平均风险评分均有所上升。在未经调整和风险调整后的分析中,NEU 和 HS 的总护理成本(TCOC)最高,门诊设施成本是总护理成本的最大驱动因素,其次是住院设施成本。HS 的药房和专业人员成本最高。经过风险调整后,全因住院和头痛相关的急诊就诊情况大致相似,但在不同风险暴露组中,PC门诊和NEU就诊的使用率不断增加:讨论:与接受PC治疗的患者相比,接受NEU或HS治疗的患者有更高的医疗发病率、更高的医疗使用率和更高的费用。结果数据要么无法获得,要么结构不完整,无法确定神经病学专业知识在头痛治疗中或特定头痛治疗路径中的价值。为了明确神经内科在原发性头痛疾病中的价值,我们鼓励医疗系统的领导者采用经济评估框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurology. Clinical practice
Neurology. Clinical practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信