The cutaneous, net clinical, and health economic benefits of advanced pneumatic compression devices in patients with lymphedema

Pinar Karaca-Mandic, Alan T. Hirsch, Stanley G. Rockson, Sheila H. Ridner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The prevalence and clinical burden of lymphedema is known to be increasing. Nevertheless, evidence-based comparative effectiveness data regarding lymphedema therapeutic interventions have been poor. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of an advanced pneumatic compression device (APCD) on cutaneous and other clinical outcomes and health economic costs in a representative privately insured population of lymphedema patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of a deidentified private insurance database from 2007 through 2013, and multivariate regression analysis comparing outcomes for the 12 months before and after APCD purchase, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. Patients with lymphedema who received an APCD who were commercially insured and Medicare managed care enrollees from a large, national US managed care health insurer. The study population was evaluated as cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema cohorts. INTERVENTION: Receipt of an APCD. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of cellulitis, use of lymphedema-related manual therapy, outpatient hospital visits, and inpatient hospitalizations. Lymphedema-related direct costs were measured for home health care, hospital outpatient care, office visits, emergency department use, and inpatient care. RESULTS: The study sample included 718 patients (374 in the cancer cohort and 344 in the noncancer cohort). In both cohorts, use of an APCD was associated with similar reductions in adjusted rates of cellulitis episodes (from 21.1%to 4.5%in the cancer cohort and 28.8% to 7.3%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), lymphedema-related manual therapy (from 35.6%to 24.9%in the cancer cohort and 32.3%to 21.2%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), and outpatient visits (from 58.6%to 41.4%in the cancer cohort and 52.6%to 31.4%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both). Among the cancer cohort, total lymphedemarelated costs per patient, excluding medical equipment costs, were reduced by 37%(from $2597 to $1642, P = .002). The corresponding decline in costs for the noncancer cohort was 36%(from $2937 to $1883, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The study found an association between significant reductions in episodes of cellulitis (cancer vs noncancer cohorts) and outpatient care and costs of APCD acquisition within a 1-year time frame in patients with both cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1187-1193
Number of pages7
JournalJAMA Dermatology
Volume151
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2015

Fingerprint

Lymphedema
Insurance Benefits
Economics
Equipment and Supplies
Skin
Cellulitis
Neoplasms
Costs and Cost Analysis
Musculoskeletal Manipulations
Managed Care Programs
Ambulatory Care
Inpatients
Outpatients
Office Visits
Insurance Carriers
Home Care Services
Medicare
Insurance
Health Care Costs
Population

Cite this

The cutaneous, net clinical, and health economic benefits of advanced pneumatic compression devices in patients with lymphedema. / Karaca-Mandic, Pinar; Hirsch, Alan T.; Rockson, Stanley G.; Ridner, Sheila H.

In: JAMA Dermatology, Vol. 151, No. 11, 11.2015, p. 1187-1193.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Karaca-Mandic, Pinar ; Hirsch, Alan T. ; Rockson, Stanley G. ; Ridner, Sheila H. / The cutaneous, net clinical, and health economic benefits of advanced pneumatic compression devices in patients with lymphedema. In: JAMA Dermatology. 2015 ; Vol. 151, No. 11. pp. 1187-1193.
@article{f3b2e13748d540a0858a1324e38ad712,
title = "The cutaneous, net clinical, and health economic benefits of advanced pneumatic compression devices in patients with lymphedema",
abstract = "IMPORTANCE: The prevalence and clinical burden of lymphedema is known to be increasing. Nevertheless, evidence-based comparative effectiveness data regarding lymphedema therapeutic interventions have been poor. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of an advanced pneumatic compression device (APCD) on cutaneous and other clinical outcomes and health economic costs in a representative privately insured population of lymphedema patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of a deidentified private insurance database from 2007 through 2013, and multivariate regression analysis comparing outcomes for the 12 months before and after APCD purchase, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. Patients with lymphedema who received an APCD who were commercially insured and Medicare managed care enrollees from a large, national US managed care health insurer. The study population was evaluated as cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema cohorts. INTERVENTION: Receipt of an APCD. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of cellulitis, use of lymphedema-related manual therapy, outpatient hospital visits, and inpatient hospitalizations. Lymphedema-related direct costs were measured for home health care, hospital outpatient care, office visits, emergency department use, and inpatient care. RESULTS: The study sample included 718 patients (374 in the cancer cohort and 344 in the noncancer cohort). In both cohorts, use of an APCD was associated with similar reductions in adjusted rates of cellulitis episodes (from 21.1{\%}to 4.5{\%}in the cancer cohort and 28.8{\%} to 7.3{\%}in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), lymphedema-related manual therapy (from 35.6{\%}to 24.9{\%}in the cancer cohort and 32.3{\%}to 21.2{\%}in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), and outpatient visits (from 58.6{\%}to 41.4{\%}in the cancer cohort and 52.6{\%}to 31.4{\%}in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both). Among the cancer cohort, total lymphedemarelated costs per patient, excluding medical equipment costs, were reduced by 37{\%}(from $2597 to $1642, P = .002). The corresponding decline in costs for the noncancer cohort was 36{\%}(from $2937 to $1883, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The study found an association between significant reductions in episodes of cellulitis (cancer vs noncancer cohorts) and outpatient care and costs of APCD acquisition within a 1-year time frame in patients with both cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema.",
author = "Pinar Karaca-Mandic and Hirsch, {Alan T.} and Rockson, {Stanley G.} and Ridner, {Sheila H.}",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.1895",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "151",
pages = "1187--1193",
journal = "JAMA Dermatology",
issn = "2168-6068",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cutaneous, net clinical, and health economic benefits of advanced pneumatic compression devices in patients with lymphedema

AU - Karaca-Mandic, Pinar

AU - Hirsch, Alan T.

AU - Rockson, Stanley G.

AU - Ridner, Sheila H.

PY - 2015/11

Y1 - 2015/11

N2 - IMPORTANCE: The prevalence and clinical burden of lymphedema is known to be increasing. Nevertheless, evidence-based comparative effectiveness data regarding lymphedema therapeutic interventions have been poor. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of an advanced pneumatic compression device (APCD) on cutaneous and other clinical outcomes and health economic costs in a representative privately insured population of lymphedema patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of a deidentified private insurance database from 2007 through 2013, and multivariate regression analysis comparing outcomes for the 12 months before and after APCD purchase, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. Patients with lymphedema who received an APCD who were commercially insured and Medicare managed care enrollees from a large, national US managed care health insurer. The study population was evaluated as cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema cohorts. INTERVENTION: Receipt of an APCD. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of cellulitis, use of lymphedema-related manual therapy, outpatient hospital visits, and inpatient hospitalizations. Lymphedema-related direct costs were measured for home health care, hospital outpatient care, office visits, emergency department use, and inpatient care. RESULTS: The study sample included 718 patients (374 in the cancer cohort and 344 in the noncancer cohort). In both cohorts, use of an APCD was associated with similar reductions in adjusted rates of cellulitis episodes (from 21.1%to 4.5%in the cancer cohort and 28.8% to 7.3%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), lymphedema-related manual therapy (from 35.6%to 24.9%in the cancer cohort and 32.3%to 21.2%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), and outpatient visits (from 58.6%to 41.4%in the cancer cohort and 52.6%to 31.4%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both). Among the cancer cohort, total lymphedemarelated costs per patient, excluding medical equipment costs, were reduced by 37%(from $2597 to $1642, P = .002). The corresponding decline in costs for the noncancer cohort was 36%(from $2937 to $1883, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The study found an association between significant reductions in episodes of cellulitis (cancer vs noncancer cohorts) and outpatient care and costs of APCD acquisition within a 1-year time frame in patients with both cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema.

AB - IMPORTANCE: The prevalence and clinical burden of lymphedema is known to be increasing. Nevertheless, evidence-based comparative effectiveness data regarding lymphedema therapeutic interventions have been poor. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of an advanced pneumatic compression device (APCD) on cutaneous and other clinical outcomes and health economic costs in a representative privately insured population of lymphedema patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of a deidentified private insurance database from 2007 through 2013, and multivariate regression analysis comparing outcomes for the 12 months before and after APCD purchase, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. Patients with lymphedema who received an APCD who were commercially insured and Medicare managed care enrollees from a large, national US managed care health insurer. The study population was evaluated as cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema cohorts. INTERVENTION: Receipt of an APCD. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of cellulitis, use of lymphedema-related manual therapy, outpatient hospital visits, and inpatient hospitalizations. Lymphedema-related direct costs were measured for home health care, hospital outpatient care, office visits, emergency department use, and inpatient care. RESULTS: The study sample included 718 patients (374 in the cancer cohort and 344 in the noncancer cohort). In both cohorts, use of an APCD was associated with similar reductions in adjusted rates of cellulitis episodes (from 21.1%to 4.5%in the cancer cohort and 28.8% to 7.3%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), lymphedema-related manual therapy (from 35.6%to 24.9%in the cancer cohort and 32.3%to 21.2%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both), and outpatient visits (from 58.6%to 41.4%in the cancer cohort and 52.6%to 31.4%in the noncancer cohort; P < .001 for both). Among the cancer cohort, total lymphedemarelated costs per patient, excluding medical equipment costs, were reduced by 37%(from $2597 to $1642, P = .002). The corresponding decline in costs for the noncancer cohort was 36%(from $2937 to $1883, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The study found an association between significant reductions in episodes of cellulitis (cancer vs noncancer cohorts) and outpatient care and costs of APCD acquisition within a 1-year time frame in patients with both cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946843920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946843920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.1895

DO - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.1895

M3 - Article

C2 - 26444458

AN - SCOPUS:84946843920

VL - 151

SP - 1187

EP - 1193

JO - JAMA Dermatology

JF - JAMA Dermatology

SN - 2168-6068

IS - 11

ER -