Remote monitoring saves costs in outpatient negative pressure wound therapy.

Leah P Griffin, Mikaela M Sifuentes
{"title":"Remote monitoring saves costs in outpatient negative pressure wound therapy.","authors":"Leah P Griffin,&nbsp;Mikaela M Sifuentes","doi":"10.37765/ajmc.2022.88738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In the outpatient setting, combining remote therapy monitoring (RTM) with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can support improved adherence to prescribed therapy. A recent study reported that patients receiving NPWT with RTM required fewer therapy days than patients receiving NPWT alone, possibly reducing costs of care. Our objective was to determine whether RTM reduced 90-day costs in patients undergoing NPWT.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving NPWT with or without RTM in the postacute setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients beginning NPWT between March 2018 and May 2019 were included. Payer claims data were collected and analyzed with t test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. Multiple regressions were performed to control for confounding variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1105 patients included the study, 675 (61%) received RTM and 430 (39%) did not. RTM patients were significantly older (P < .0001), had more ulcers (P = .0004), and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores (P < .0001). The unadjusted mean 90-day wound-related cost was not significantly higher for non-RTM patients than for RTM patients (P = .0799). After controlling for differences in age, payer type, CCI score, and wound type, there was a significant reduction in 90-day wound-related costs in the RTM group compared with the non-RTM group ($11,119 vs $14,752; P = .0131). The RTM group had higher NPWT costs ($3757 vs $3289; P = .0035) but lower wound-related non-NPWT costs ($7361 vs $11,462; P = .0045).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated the value of RTM in supporting NPWT adherence and decreasing the costs of wound care in these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":267832,"journal":{"name":"The American journal of managed care","volume":" ","pages":"53-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American journal of managed care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2022.88738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: In the outpatient setting, combining remote therapy monitoring (RTM) with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can support improved adherence to prescribed therapy. A recent study reported that patients receiving NPWT with RTM required fewer therapy days than patients receiving NPWT alone, possibly reducing costs of care. Our objective was to determine whether RTM reduced 90-day costs in patients undergoing NPWT.

Study design: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving NPWT with or without RTM in the postacute setting.

Methods: Patients beginning NPWT between March 2018 and May 2019 were included. Payer claims data were collected and analyzed with t test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. Multiple regressions were performed to control for confounding variables.

Results: Of the 1105 patients included the study, 675 (61%) received RTM and 430 (39%) did not. RTM patients were significantly older (P < .0001), had more ulcers (P = .0004), and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores (P < .0001). The unadjusted mean 90-day wound-related cost was not significantly higher for non-RTM patients than for RTM patients (P = .0799). After controlling for differences in age, payer type, CCI score, and wound type, there was a significant reduction in 90-day wound-related costs in the RTM group compared with the non-RTM group ($11,119 vs $14,752; P = .0131). The RTM group had higher NPWT costs ($3757 vs $3289; P = .0035) but lower wound-related non-NPWT costs ($7361 vs $11,462; P = .0045).

Conclusions: This study demonstrated the value of RTM in supporting NPWT adherence and decreasing the costs of wound care in these patients.

远程监测节省了门诊负压伤口治疗的费用。
目的:在门诊环境中,将远程治疗监测(RTM)与负压伤口治疗(NPWT)相结合可以提高对处方治疗的依从性。最近的一项研究报道,与单独接受NPWT的患者相比,接受RTM的NPWT患者需要更少的治疗天数,可能会降低护理成本。我们的目的是确定RTM是否减少了NPWT患者90天的费用。研究设计:我们对急性后接受NPWT伴或不伴RTM的患者进行了回顾性队列研究。方法:纳入2018年3月至2019年5月期间开始NPWT的患者。收集付款人理赔数据,对连续变量采用t检验,对分类变量采用χ2检验。采用多元回归控制混杂变量。结果:纳入研究的1105例患者中,675例(61%)接受了RTM治疗,430例(39%)未接受RTM治疗。结论:本研究证明了RTM在支持NPWT依从性和降低这些患者伤口护理成本方面的价值。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书