Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:39:15.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cost analysis of home monitoring in lung transplant recipients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2007

Terrence J. Adam
Affiliation:
Mayo Clinic Arizona
Stanley M. Finkelstein
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Stephen T. Parente
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Marshall I. Hertz
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota

Abstract

Objectives: The University of Minnesota has maintained a home monitoring program for over 10 years for lung and heart–lung transplant patients. A cost analysis was completed to assess the impact of home monitoring on the cost of post-transplant medical care.

Methods: Clinical information gathered with the monitoring system includes spirometry, vital signs, and symptom data. To estimate the impact of this system on medical costs, we completed a retrospective analysis of the effects of home monitoring on the cost of post-lung transplant medical care. The cost analysis used multivariate linear regression with inpatient, outpatient, and total medical care costs as the dependent variables. The independent variables for the regression include home monitoring adherence, underlying disease, ambulatory diagnostic group mapping variables, transplant type, and patient demographics.

Results: The multivariate regression of the overall cost results predicts a 52.4 percent reduction in total costs with 100 percent patient adherence; this rate includes a 72.24 percent reduction in inpatient costs and a 46.6 percent increase in outpatient costs. The actual first year average patient adherence was 74 percent.

Conclusions: Adherence to home monitoring increases outpatient costs and reduces inpatient costs and provides an overall cost savings. The break-even point for patient adherence was 25.28 percent, where the net savings covered the cost of home monitoring. This is well within the actual first year adherence rates (74 percent) for subjects in the lung transplant home monitoring program, providing a net savings with adherence to home monitoring.

Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Al, MJ, Koopmanschap, MA, van, Enckevort PJ et al. , Cost-effectiveness of lung transplantation in The Netherlands: A scenario analysis. Chest. 1998; 113: 124130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Adam, TJ. Cost analysis of home monitoring in post-lung transplant patients. (Doctoral Thesis). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; 2003.Google Scholar
3.Agha, Z, Schapira, RM, Maker, AH. Cost effectiveness of telemedicine for the delivery of outpatient pulmonary care to a rural population. Telemed J E Health. 2002; 8: 281291.Google Scholar
4.Bjortuft, O, Johansen, B, Boe, J et al. , Daily home spirometry facilitates early detection of rejection in single lung transplant recipients with emphysema. Eur Respir J. 1993; 6: 705708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Elasy, TA, Ellis, SE, Brown, A et al. , A taxonomy for diabetes educational interventions. Patient Educ Couns. 2001; 43: 121127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Finkelstein, SM, Snyder, M, Edin-Stibbe, C et al. , Monitoring progress after lung transplantation from home–patient adherence. J Med Eng Technol. 1996; 20: 203210.Google Scholar
7.Finkelstein, SM, Snyder, M, Edin-Stibbe, C et al. , Staging of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome using home spirometry. Chest. 1999; 116: 120126.Google Scholar
8.Geertsma, A, Ten, Vergert EM, Bonsel, GJ et al. , Does lung transplantation prolong life? A comparison of survival with and without transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant. 1998; 17: 511516.Google ScholarPubMed
9.Goldstein, NL, Snyder, M, Edin, C et al. , Comparison of two teaching strategies: Adherence to a home monitoring program. Clin Nurs Res. 1996; 5: 150166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Gross, CR, Savik, K, Bolman, RM et al. , Long-term health status and quality of life outcomes of lung transplant recipients. Chest. 1996; 108: 15871593.Google Scholar
11.Hamid, S, Corden, ZM, Ryan, DP et al. , Evaluation of an electronic hand-held spirometer in patients with asthma. Respir Med. 1998; 92: 11771180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Hosenpud, JD, Bennett, LE, Keck, BM et al. , The registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Seventeenth official report-2000. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2000; 19: 909931.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Hosenpud, JD, Bennett, LE, Keck, BM, Boucek, MM, Novick, RJ. The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Eighteenth Official Report-2001. Heart Lung Transplant. 2001; 20: 805815.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Ignacio-Garcia, JM, Gonzalez-Santos, P. Asthma self-management education program by home monitoring of peak expiratory flow. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995; 151 (Pt 1): 353359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Kaplan, RM, Bush, JW. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1982; 1: 6180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Lanuza, DM, Lefaiver, C, McCabe, M et al. , Prospective study of functional status and quality of life before and after lung transplantation. Chest. 2000; 118: 115122.Google Scholar
17.Lindgren, BR, Finkelstein, SM, Prasad, B et al. , Determination of reliability and validity in home monitoring data of pulmonary function tests following lung transplantation. Res Nurs Health. 1997; 20: 539550.Google Scholar
18.McAlister, FA, Stewart, S, Ferrua, S et al. , Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission: A systematic review of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44: 810819.Google ScholarPubMed
19.Neumeyer-Gromen, A, Lampert, T, Stark, K et al. , Disease management programs for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Care. 2004; 42: 12111221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Otulana, BA, Higenbottam, T, Ferrari, L et al. , The use of home spirometry in detecting acute lung rejection and infection following heart-lung transplantation. Chest. 1990; 97: 353357.Google Scholar
21.Pinson, CW, Feurer, ID, Payne, JL et al. , Health-related quality of life after different types of solid organ transplantation. Ann Surg. 2000; 232: 597607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Ramsey, SD, Patrick, DL, Lewis, S et al. , Improvement in quality of life after lung transplantation: A preliminary study. The University of Washington Medical Center Lung Transplant Study Group. J Heart Lung Transplant. 1995; 14: 870877.Google Scholar
23.Starfield, B, Weiner, J, Mumford, L et al. , Ambulatory care groups: A categorization of diagnoses for research and management. Health Serv Res. 1991; 26: 5374.Google Scholar
24.TenVergert, EM, Essink-Bot, ML, Geertsma, A et al. , The effect of lung transplantation on health-related quality of life: A longitudinal study. Chest. 1998; 113: 358–64.Google Scholar
25.Tinkelman, D, Wilson, S. Asthma disease management: Regression to the mean or better? Am J Manag Care. 2004; 10: 948954.Google Scholar
26.Trulock, EP, Edwards, LB, Taylor, DO et al. , Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Twenty-second official adult lung and heart-lung transplant report–2005. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005; 24: 956967.Google Scholar
27.van, Enckevort PJ, TenVergert, EM, Bonsel, GJ et al. , Technology assessment of the Dutch Lung Transplantation Program. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998; 14: 344356.Google Scholar
28.Wagner, FM, Weber, A, Park, JW et al. , New telemetric system for daily pulmonary function surveillance of lung transplant recipients. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999; 68: 20332038.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed