4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Cost Burden of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Claims-Based Study

期刊

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
卷 144, 期 3, 页码 440-445

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0194599810391852

关键词

rhinosinusitis; general otolaryngology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To quantify the cost burden and utilization of health care for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Study Design. Historical cohort study. Setting. Academic medical centers. Methods. Medical claims data from 2003 to 2008 were analyzed. Patients were defined as having chronic sinus disease if they had a minimum of 2 CRS-related diagnoses with either computed tomography scanning or endoscopy performed between diagnoses. The prevalence and costs of CRS from the payer perspective (reimbursements) were determined. Results. More than 4.4 million patients with an average of 3.1 years of eligibility and at least 1 diagnosis of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) or CRS were studied. A total of 5.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.4%-5.6%) of those with ARS were diagnosed with CRS in the subsequent 4 years. Among patients with chronic disease, after 12 months, 39% were still consuming care for CRS, and after 24 months, nearly 28% were still doing so. Of the CRS patients whose diagnosis was confirmed with endoscopy or radiology, 46.2% underwent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). In the year prior to ESS, patient care costs averaged $2449 ($2341-$2556). The ESS procedure plus 45-day postprocedure debridement and medical therapy costs averaged $7726 ($7554-$7898). In the year following the 45-day postprocedure period, consumption dropped by $885 (P < .0001). In the second year following ESS, therapy costs dropped an additional $446 (P < .0001). Conclusions. A significant proportion of CRS patients require ongoing treatment of their sinus disease for years. Sinus surgery appears to reduce consumption of rhinosinusitis-related health care, but costs related to the procedure are significant.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据