Healthcare Costs and Resource Use of Patients with Dupuytren Contracture Treated with Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum or Fasciectomy: A Propensity Matching Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vladimir Zah,1 Jovana Pelivanovic,1 Simona Tatovic,1 Djurdja Vukicevic,1 Martina Imro,1 Jane Ruby,2 David Hurley2 1Health Economics and Outcomes Research Department, ZRx Outcomes Research Inc., Mississauga, ON, Canada; 2Medical Affairs, Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., Malvern, PA, USACorrespondence: Vladimir ZahZRx Outcomes Research Inc, Mississauga, ON, CanadaTel +1 416-953-4427Email vzah@outcomesresearch.caObjective: Studies examining differences in US healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated healthcare costs between collagenase clostridium histolyticum (CCH) and fasciectomy for Dupuytren contracture (DC) are limited. This study evaluated US HCRU and direct healthcare cost for the treatment of DC in privately insured patients using insurance claims.Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed data from large nationwide insurance claims databases; it included individuals diagnosed with DC between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2017, who were adults at index date (date of first treatment: CCH or fasciectomy). Participants had continuous health plan coverage 24 months pre-index and 12 months post-index date. All-cause and DC-related HCRU and healthcare costs from the payers’ perspective were compared between propensity score–matched cohorts. Generalized linear models assessed factors associated with all-cause total healthcare costs.Results: Of 83,983 patients diagnosed with DC, 1932 adults receiving fasciectomy and 953 adults receiving CCH were included. The mean ± standard deviation total all-cause healthcare cost was significantly lower with CCH than with fasciectomy (US$11,897 ± US$14,633 versus US$15,528 ± US$22,254, respectively; P< 0.001). After propensity score matching, 702 and 999 patients remained in the CCH and fasciectomy cohorts, respectively. In this analysis, all-cause and DC-related total costs were significantly lower in the CCH cohort versus the fasciectomy cohort (all-cause: US$11,044 ± US$12,856 versus US$12,912 ± US$19,237, respectively, P=0.02; DC-specific: US$3417 ± US$3671 versus US$5800 ± US$4985, P< 0.001), mainly due to the lower frequency of outpatient visits. CCH treatment and the use of a consumer-driven healthcare plan were associated with lower healthcare costs.Conclusion: Based on matched cohort data, adjusted 1-year healthcare costs for CCH-treated individuals were significantly lower compared with costs for fasciectomy-treated individuals.Keywords: injection, surgery, insurance claims, retrospective database study
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".