Employer-perspective cost comparison of surgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding
Author(s) -
Jeffrey D. Miller,
Machaon Bonafede,
Scott Pohlman,
Aarathi Cholkeri-Singh,
K.A. Troeger
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of comparative effectiveness research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.567
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 2042-6313
pISSN - 2042-6305
DOI - 10.2217/cer-2019-0102
Subject(s) - medicine , hysterectomy , indirect costs , endometrial ablation , direct cost , perspective (graphical) , gynecology , surgery , computer science , business , artificial intelligence , accounting
Aim: To estimate direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a self-insured employer's perspective. Methods: Employer-sponsored insurance claims data were analyzed to estimate costs owing to absence and short-term disability 1 year following global endometrial ablation (GEA), outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH). Results: Costs for women who had GEA are substantially less than costs for women who had either OPH or IPH, with the difference ranging from approximately $7700 to approximately $10,000 for direct costs and approximately $4200 to approximately $4600 for indirect costs. Women who had GEA missed 21.8–24.0 fewer works days. Conclusion: Study results suggest lower healthcare costs associated with GEA versus OPH or IPH from a self-insured employer perspective.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom