Currently Viewing:
The American Journal of Managed Care October 2018
Putting the Pieces Together: EHR Communication and Diabetes Patient Outcomes
Marlon P. Mundt, PhD, and Larissa I. Zakletskaia, MA
Primary Care Physician Resource Use Changes Associated With Feedback Reports
Eva Chang, PhD, MPH; Diana S.M. Buist, PhD, MPH; Matt Handley, MD; Eric Johnson, MS; Sharon Fuller, BA; Roy Pardee, JD, MA; Gabrielle Gundersen, MPH; and Robert J. Reid, MD, PhD
From the Editorial Board: Bruce W. Sherman, MD
Bruce W. Sherman, MD
Currently Reading
Recent Study on Site of Care Has Severe Limitations
Lucio N. Gordan, MD, and Debra Patt, MD
The Characteristics of Physician Practices Joining the Early ACOs: Looking Back to Look Forward
Stephen M. Shortell, PhD, MPH, MBA; Patricia P. Ramsay, MPH; Laurence C. Baker, PhD; Michael F. Pesko, PhD; and Lawrence P. Casalino, MD, PhD
Nudging Physicians and Patients With Autopend Clinical Decision Support to Improve Diabetes Management
Laura Panattoni, PhD; Albert Chan, MD, MS; Yan Yang, PhD; Cliff Olson, MBA; and Ming Tai-Seale, PhD, MPH
Medicare Underpayment for Diabetes Prevention Program: Implications for DPP Suppliers
Amanda S. Parsons, MD; Varna Raman, MBA; Bronwyn Starr, MPH; Mark Zezza, PhD; and Colin D. Rehm, PhD
Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Use Associated With Optimal ESRD Starts
Peter W. Crooks, MD; Christopher O. Thomas, MD; Amy Compton-Phillips, MD; Wendy Leith, MS, MPH; Alvina Sundang, MBA; Yi Yvonne Zhou, PhD; and Linda Radler, MBA
Medicare Savings From Conservative Management of Low Back Pain
Alan M. Garber, MD, PhD; Tej D. Azad, BA; Anjali Dixit, MD; Monica Farid, BS; Edward Sung, BS, BSE; Daniel Vail, BA; and Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD
CMS HCC Risk Scores and Home Health Patient Experience Measures
Hsueh-Fen Chen, PhD; J. Mick Tilford, PhD; Fei Wan, PhD; and Robert Schuldt, MA
An Early Warning Tool for Predicting at Admission the Discharge Disposition of a Hospitalized Patient
Nicholas Ballester, PhD; Pratik J. Parikh, PhD; Michael Donlin, MSN, ACNP-BC, FHM; Elizabeth K. May, MS; and Steven R. Simon, MD, MPH
Gatekeeping and Patterns of Outpatient Care Post Healthcare Reform
Michael L. Barnett, MD, MS; Zirui Song, MD, PhD; Asaf Bitton, MD, MPH; Sherri Rose, PhD; and Bruce E. Landon, MD, MBA, MSc

Recent Study on Site of Care Has Severe Limitations

Lucio N. Gordan, MD, and Debra Patt, MD
The outpatient community oncology setting is consistently less costly for cancer treatment as opposed to the outpatient hospital setting.
Am J Manag Care. 2018;24(10):450
A recent study published in the July 2018 issue of this journal by Kalidindi et al attempts to compare chemotherapy and administration costs in the outpatient clinic setting versus hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) for Medicare beneficiaries.1 The study has several limitations: (1) It does not account for the adjustment by comorbid illnesses and cancer stage; (2) the 2 populations of patients studied were quite different, as exemplified by the severe imbalance in cancer types; and (3) there is a lack of detailed information as far as rigorous statistical analysis.

We specifically note that the lack of accounting for comorbid illness and stage of cancer calls into question if the cohorts used in the analysis were balanced. While stage information is not routinely available in the Medicare supplemental file, the authors should have been able to investigate for comorbid illness with the commonly used Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index.

Although the study information provided is thought-provoking, it fails to meaningfully contribute to the field of healthcare cost research given its significant constraints. It is very narrowly focused because it does not (1) comprehensively look at all of the costs related to chemotherapy by site of service, (2) factor in the increasing use of oral oncolytics, or (3) analyze the total cost of cancer care.

All costs associated with chemotherapy must include supportive care drugs, to prevent and treat nausea and infusion reactions, and the supplemental therapies that patients with cancer receive. It is unclear if the authors specifically included the cost of growth factors that are often administered with chemotherapy. Many supportive care therapies can increase the cost of care significantly, and their omission biases the total cost of treatment related to following treatment guidelines.

In a striking omission, the authors failed to include other expenditures associated with chemotherapy administration that vary by site of service. These include facility fees that are an additional charge at HOPDs but not in the physician office. Facility fees are incremental charges billed to patients receiving care in HOPDs and often represent noteworthy out-of-pocket expenses for patients.

Finally, looking solely at Medicare-related costs of chemotherapy and administration does not provide an accurate view of the cancer treatment payment landscape, because Medicare is an outlier in terms of differential contracting in comparison with commercial insurance plans. In a study recently published by Winn et al,2 researchers found that the total cost of cancer care in HOPDs was approximately double (per day and at 6 months) compared with the cost in the physician office setting. Specifically, spending at the drug level was significantly lower in physician offices versus in HOPDs ($1466 [95% CI, $1457-$1474] vs $3799 [95% CI, $3761-$3836]; P <.001). Day-level spending also was lower for patients treated in physician offices ($3502 [95% CI, $3490-$3515] vs $7973 [95% CI, $7927-$8019]; P <.001). Total reimbursement during the 6-month treatment episode again was lower in physician offices ($43,700 [95% CI, $42,885-$44,517] vs $84,660 [95% CI, $82,969-$86,352]; P <.001).2 Evaluating the commercial payer space demonstrates a substantially increased cost at HOPDs compared with physician offices.
Author Affiliations: Quality/Informatics, Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute (LNG), Fort Myers, FL; Texas Oncology (DP), Austin, TX.

Source of Funding: None.

Author Disclosures: Dr Gordan is a board member of Florida Cancer Specialists and American Oncology Network and is employed by Florida Cancer Specialists. Dr Patt is employed by Texas Oncology.

Authorship Information: Concept and design (LNG, DP); acquisition of data (LNG, DP); analysis and interpretation of data (LNG, DP); drafting of the manuscript (LNG, DP); critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content (LNG, DP); statistical analysis (LNG); administrative, technical, or logistic support (LNG, DP); and supervision (DP).

Address Correspondence to: Lucio N. Gordan, MD, Quality/Informatics, Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, 6420 W Newberry Rd, Gainesville, FL 32605. Email: lgordan@flcancer.com.
REFERENCES

1. Kalidindi Y, Jung J, Feldman R. Differences in spending on provider-administered chemotherapy by site of care in Medicare. Am J Manag Care. 2018;24(7):328-333.

2. Winn AN, Keating NL, Trogdon JG, Basch EM, Dusetzina SB. Spending by commercial insurers on chemotherapy based on site of care, 2004-2014. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(4):580-581. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5544. 
PDF
 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2019 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up