J. B. Silvers

Patient and Hospital Characteristics Associated with Patient Assessments of Hospital Obstetrical Care

OBJECTIVES The goals of this study were to examine the relationship of patient assessments of hospital care with patient and hospital characteristics. In addition, the authors sought to assess relationships between patient assessments and other patient-derived measures of care (eg, how much they were helped by the hospitalization and amount of pain experienced). METHODS The authors surveyed 16,051 women (response rate, 58%) discharged after labor and delivery from 18 hospitals during the study period of 1992 to 1994. Patient assessments were obtained using a previously validated survey instrument, Patient Judgment of Hospital Quality, that includes eight scales assessing different aspects of the process of care (eg, physician care, discharge procedures) and other single item assessments (eg, overall quality). For this study, we utilized five of the scales (physician care, nursing care, information, discharge preparation, global assessments [willingness to brag, recommend or return to the hospital]). For analysis, items were rated on a five-point ordinal scale from poor to excellent. For scoring purposes, responses were transformed to linear ratings, ranging from 0 to 100 (eg, 0 = poor care, 100 = excellent care). RESULTS In multivariable analyses, the authors found that patients who were older, white, not married, uninsured or had commercial insurance, and in better health status were significantly more likely to give higher assessments (P < 0.01), although very little of the variance in assessment scores was explained by these characteristics (2%-3%). In bivariate analyses, patient assessments were higher in nonteaching hospitals and those with fewer beds, fewer deliveries, lower cesarean-section (C-section) rates, fewer patients with Medicaid, and higher rates of vaginal births after C-section deliveries. When these variables were utilized as independent predictors in multivariable analyses using adjusted nested linear regression (to account for clustering of patients), few of the hospital characteristics reached a level of statistical significance. Finally, correlations between the five scales and other patient assessments of quality, such as how much they were helped by the hospitalization, were statistically significant (P < 0.01) and high in magnitude, ranging from 0.47 to 0.61. CONCLUSIONS Although hospital scores differed according to several patient and hospital characteristics, the magnitude of the associations was relatively small. The findings suggest that, with respect to obstetric care, patient assessments may represent a robust measure that can be applied to diverse hospitals and patient casemix.

Growth Hormone Therapy and Quality of Life in Adults and Children

AbstractA fundamental goal of growth hormone (GH) treatment for both adults and children is improvement in quality of life (QOL). Assessments of the therapeutic role of GH depend on its effectiveness in meeting this and other goals (including improved metabolic status in adults and improved growth in children) in relation to economic parameters. However, there are difficulties in interpreting data on GH treatment and QOL. These include controversy about appropriate definitions and measures for assessing QOL, disease adaptation, comorbid conditions, and potential patient selection bias.In GH-deficient adults who have completed linear growth, there is considerable evidence that GH exerts effects on body composition, serum lipids, and bone and mineral density. Several controlled trials have also examined the effect of GH treatment on QOL in GH-deficient adults. They generally indicate improvement in QOL with GH treatment, although there are inconsistencies in the data. Caveats include differing outcome measures and instruments, instruments that are not disease specific, variation in characteristics of patient samples and treatment protocols, evidence of a placebo effect, and some inconsistency among results. Open-label trials in adults also suggest improvement in QOL with GH treatment, although interpretation is limited by potential placebo effects and patient self-selection. p ]Studies in children have generally addressed psychological status, and relatively few specifically focus on QOL. In children with classical GH deficiency, it is intuitive that GH treatment will improve QOL, although hard data are lacking. In children with idiopathic short stature, evidence for improved QOL as a result of GH treatment is not well developed.Translating changes in QOL, together with physiological and metabolic benefits, into economic cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analyses are needed. In doing so, it will be important to consider subgroups of patients who may derive differential benefit from GH treatment. These analyses are central to the development of a framework for research, decision making, and policy for GH treatment.

A National Study of Physician Recommendations to Initiate and Discontinue Growth Hormone for Short Stature

OBJECTIVES: Overall growth hormone (GH) use depends on decisions to both initiate treatment and continue treatment. The determinants of both are unclear. We studied how physicians decided to begin GH in idiopathic short stature and how, after an initial course of treatment, they decided to continue, intensify (increase the dose), or terminate treatment. METHODS: We used a national census study of 727 pediatric endocrinologists involving a structured questionnaires with a factorial experimental design. Main outcome measures were GH recommendations for previously untreated children and those children who were treated with GH for 1 year. RESULTS: The response rate was 90%. In previously untreated children, recommendations to initiate GH were consistent with guidelines and also influenced by family preferences and physician attitudes (P < .001). In children treated with GH, recommendations on whether to continue GH were influenced by the growth response to therapy (P < .01) but were divided regarding course of action. With identical growth responses to treatment, physician decisions diverged (intensify versus discontinue GH) and were driven by independent, nonphysiologic, and contextual factors (eg, physician attitudes, family preferences, and GH-initiation recommendation; each P < .001). Together, attitudinal and contextual factors exerted more influence on continuation decisions than did the growth response to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Physician decisions to initiate GH are largely consistent with evidence-based medicine. However, decisions about continuing GH vary and are strongly influenced by factors other than response to treatment. With a potential market of 500 000 US children and costs exceeding

Patient, physician, and consumer drivers: referrals for short stature and access to specialty drugs.

10 billion per year, changes in GH use may depend on potentially modifiable physician attitudes and family preferences as much as physiologic evidence.

Patient Attitudes and Preferences Regarding Treatment: GH Therapy for Childhood Short Stature

Background:Candidates for specialty drugs, the fastest growing and costliest pharmaceuticals, typically originate with primary care referrals. However, little is known about what drives such referrals—especially for large populations such as short, otherwise normal children (idiopathic short stature). Recent expanded approval of growth hormone (GH) makes more than 585,000 US children eligible for such treatment, potentially costing over

The Affordable Care Act: Objectives and Likely Results in an Imperfect World

11 billion/y. Methods:To quantify the relative impact of patient physiological indicators, physician characteristics, and consumer preferences on referrals to endocrinologists (and potential access to GH) for short children, a national study of 1268 randomly selected US pediatricians was conducted, based on a full factorial experimental design in a structured survey. Results:While patient indicators (height, growth pattern) influenced referrals (P < 0.001), consumer drivers (family concern) and physician attitudes had almost as great an impact—especially for children with less severe growth impairment (P < 0.001). Physician belief that short stature impairs emotional well-being and physician characteristics (female, older, shorter, beliefs about drug company information) increased referrals (P < 0.03–0.001)—independent of growth parameters. Conclusions:Referral recommendations that create the pool of candidates for the specialty drug GH are heavily swayed by physician characteristics and consumer preferences, particularly in the absence of compelling physiological evidence. This makes most of children with short stature strikingly susceptible to nonphysiological influences on referrals that render them candidates for this specialty drug. Only 1 additional referral per US pediatrician would likely increase GH costs by over

Growth Hormone and Health Policy

100 million/y.

Hospital free cash flow

This paper examines the role of parents’ attitudes and preferences regarding growth hormone therapy for childhood short stature. Four main questions are addressed. First, what are the demographic characteristics of families seeking medical advice for their child’s short stature? Second, what are parents’ attitudes towards short stature? Third, what are parents’ treatment preferences (i.e. what characteristics of growth treatments are important to parents)? Finally, how do the attitudes of parents affect physician decision making? Several studies are reviewed and data are presented to answer these questions.

The Effect of Fixed Payment on Hospital Costs

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has 3 main objectives: (1) to reform the private insurance market—especially for individuals and small-group purchasers, (2) to expand Medicaid to the working poor with income up to 133% of the federal poverty level, and (3) to change the way

Physician decisions to discontinue long-term medications using a two-stage framework: The case of growth hormone therapy

GH treatment for short children is representative of many frontline issues in health care policy. In this paper, we highlight key policy issues exemplified by GH, focusing on pharmaceutical innovation, insurance coverage and pricing, and physician decisions, and we discuss their implications for endocrinology and GH use.