Nancy A. Nickman
University of Utah
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Nancy A. Nickman.
Gynecologic Oncology | 2015
L. Andy Chen; Jaewhan Kim; Kenneth M. Boucher; Breanne E. Terakedis; Britney Williams; Nancy A. Nickman; David K. Gaffney
OBJECTIVE To evaluate toxicity and cost-effectiveness of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) versus 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) in the postoperative treatment of uterine and cervical cancer. METHODS Between 2000 and 2012, eighty patients at our institution received post-hysterectomy 3DCRT (46) or IMRT (34) for uterine or cervical cancer. Baseline characteristics, outcome, and ≥CTCAE grade 2 toxicities were compared between the two groups. Predictors of toxicity-free survival were identified. A decision analysis model was designed to capture individual health states at 1, 2, and 3 years after treatment. Micro-costing technique and estimated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS Utilization of IMRT increased from 25% (2005-2007) to 75% (2008-2012). Recurrence-free and overall survival rates were not different between the two groups. Toxicity rates were reduced with IMRT versus 3DCRT (HR 0.42, p=0.04). Women who received IMRT had numerically lower rates of late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity and significantly lower rates of late overall toxicity at 3 years (16% vs. 45%, p=0.04). On univariate analysis, IMRT was associated with decreased late toxicity (HR 0.43, p=0.04). Treatment costs were higher and toxicity costs were lower with IMRT. IMRT had an ICER of
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society | 2012
Carrie McAdam-Marx; Sudhir Unni; Xiangyang Ye; Scott Nelson; Nancy A. Nickman
235,233 (year 1),
Journal of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy | 2013
Beilei Cai; Nancy A. Nickman; David K. Gaffney
114,270 (year 2), and
BMC Nursing | 2010
Nancy A. Nickman; Sandra W. Haak; Jaewhan Kim
75,555 (year 3) per QALY gained. CONCLUSION IMRT is associated with reduced late overall toxicity compared to 3DCRT without compromising clinical outcome. IMRT is not cost-effective during the early chronic toxicity phase, but it becomes more cost-effective over time.
The Journal of community and supportive oncology | 2015
Nancy A. Nickman; Xiangyang Ye; David K. Gaffney; Reed B. Barney; Joseph Biskupiak; Gary J. Okano; Vinson C. Lee; Jorge Arellano
To determine bone mineral density (BMD) testing rates and the proportion of women diagnosed after BMD screening vs an osteoporosis‐related fracture before and after reductions in Medicare reimbursement for office‐based imaging services in 2007, which was projected to save
American Journal of Health-system Pharmacy | 2014
Gwen Volpe; Nancy A. Nickman; Wendy E. Bussard; Barbara Giacomelli; Darren S. Ferer; Chris Urbanski; Leslie Brookins
2.8B over 5 years.
Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare | 2010
Nancy A. Nickman; Sandra W. Haak; Jaewhan Kim
ABSTRACT Bone is the third most common organ affected by neoplastic metastases, and about 70% of patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer that develop metastases will have osseous involvement. As part of a multi-pronged approach to pain management in these patients, external beam radio therapy (EBRT) continues to be a mainstay of treatment for metastatic bone pain. This article reviews the role of radiation therapy in palliative management strategies for patients with bone metastases, including the clinical and cost-effectiveness of single fraction (SFRT) versus multiple fraction (MFRT) EBRT in pain relief. Studies indicate that SFRT is more cost-effective than MFRT, yet both are clinically effective in pain management. Therefore, EBRT use retains an important place among analgesia, bone modifying agents, chemotherapy, and hormone therapy in improving quality of life (QoL) and reducing morbidity from metastatic bone pain.
American Behavioral Scientist | 1999
Reba L. Keele; Nancy A. Nickman
BackgroundNumerous pen devices are available to administer recombinant Human Growth Hormone (rhGH), and both patients and health plans have varying issues to consider when selecting a particular product and device for daily use. Therefore, the present study utilized multi-dimensional product analysis to assess potential time involvement, required weekly administration steps, and utilization costs relative to daily rhGH administration.MethodsStudy objectives were to conduct 1) Time-and-Motion (TM) simulations in a randomized block design that allowed time and steps comparisons related to rhGH preparation, administration and storage, and 2) a Cost Minimization Analysis (CMA) relative to opportunity and supply costs. Nurses naïve to rhGH administration and devices were recruited to evaluate four rhGH pen devices (2 in liquid form, 2 requiring reconstitution) via TM simulations. Five videotaped and timed trials for each product were evaluated based on: 1) Learning (initial use instructions), 2) Preparation (arrange device for use), 3) Administration (actual simulation manikin injection), and 4) Storage (maintain product viability between doses), in addition to assessment of steps required for weekly use. The CMA applied micro-costing techniques related to opportunity costs for caregivers (categorized as wages), non-drug medical supplies, and drug product costs.ResultsNorditropin® NordiFlex and Norditropin® NordiPen (NNF and NNP, Novo Nordisk, Inc., Bagsværd, Denmark) took less weekly Total Time (p < 0.05) to use than either of the comparator products, Genotropin® Pen (GTP, Pfizer, Inc, New York, New York) or HumatroPen® (HTP, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana). Time savings were directly related to differences in new package Preparation times (NNF (1.35 minutes), NNP (2.48 minutes) GTP (4.11 minutes), HTP (8.64 minutes), p < 0.05)). Administration and Storage times were not statistically different. NNF (15.8 minutes) and NNP (16.2 minutes) also took less time to Learn than HTP (24.0 minutes) and GTP (26.0 minutes), p < 0.05). The number of weekly required administration steps was also least with NNF and NNP. Opportunity cost savings were greater in devices that were easier to prepare for use; GTP represented an 11.8% drug product savings over NNF, NNP and HTP at time of study. Overall supply costs represented <1% of drug costs for all devices.ConclusionsTime-and-motion simulation data used to support a micro-cost analysis demonstrated that the pen device with the greater time demand has highest net costs.
The Breast | 2013
Jason Young; Nancy A. Nickman; Joseph Biskupiak; Reed B. Barney; David K. Gaffney; Madhav Namjoshi; Patricia Brandt
BACKGROUND Evaluations of the costs of palliative external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for treatment of bone metastases are limited. OBJECTIVE To summarize EBRT lifetime care patterns in deceased men with metastatic prostate cancer treated in a cancer hospital in the United States. METHODS A retrospective review of electronic health records identified deceased adult prostate cancer (ICD-9 185.xx) patients with bone metastases (ICD-9 198.5) and who were treated for bone pain and metastasis management with EBRT between January 1, 1995 and December 17, 2012. Common Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify all EBRT episodes (total billed EBRT services; initial and final evaluation) to calculate length of EBRT treatments and per episode costs (2011 US
Medicine | 2018
Yan Cheng; Nancy A. Nickman; Christine Jamjian; Vanessa Stevens; Yue Zhang; Brian C. Sauer; Joanne LaFleur
). Bootstrapping approximated the 95% confidence interval for final cost estimates. RESULTS 176 men were identified; 19 (10.8%) had bone metastases in >1 site. Eighty-nine men (50.6%) received >1 EBRT episode (range, 1-6; median, 2), with first episode length ranging from 1-44 calendar days (mean, 13.4; SD, 8.4) at a mean cost of