Cost-effectiveness of two types of dysphagia care in head and neck cancer: A preliminary report

J. E. Aviv; R. T. Sataloff; M. Cohen; J. Spitzer; G. Ma; R. Bhayani; L. G. Close

doi:10.1177/014556130108000818

Cost-effectiveness of two types of dysphagia care in head and neck cancer: A preliminary report

J. E. Aviv, R. T. Sataloff, M. Cohen, J. Spitzer, G. Ma, R. Bhayani, L. G. Close

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

27 Scopus citations

Abstract

We conducted a prospective, preliminary study to compare the cost-effectiveness of two different instrument-based techniques for diagnosing and managing dysphagia in 30 consecutive hospitalized patients with head and neck cancer. The two techniques are videofluoroscopy via modified barium swallow (MBS) and videoendoscopy via flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST). Medicare was the primary insurer of all patients. Fifteen of these patients had their dysphagia diagnosed and managed by MBS and the other 15 by FEESST. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by determining the average Medicare reimbursement for each procedure. We found that the mean reimbursements were $451.01 (± $50.55)for MBS and $321.23 (± $3.01)for FEESST. The mean reimbursement for FEESST was significantly lower than that for MBS (p<0.0001; Mann-Whitney U test). We conclude that FEESST appears to be more cost-effective than MBS for the inpatient management of dysphagia in patients with head and neck cancer.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	553-558
Number of pages	6
Journal	Ear, Nose and Throat Journal
Volume	80
Issue number	8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/014556130108000818
State	Published - 2001
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1177/014556130108000818

Cite this

@article{60f3eefd4f054b30a3c46131c97bf95c,

title = "Cost-effectiveness of two types of dysphagia care in head and neck cancer: A preliminary report",

abstract = "We conducted a prospective, preliminary study to compare the cost-effectiveness of two different instrument-based techniques for diagnosing and managing dysphagia in 30 consecutive hospitalized patients with head and neck cancer. The two techniques are videofluoroscopy via modified barium swallow (MBS) and videoendoscopy via flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST). Medicare was the primary insurer of all patients. Fifteen of these patients had their dysphagia diagnosed and managed by MBS and the other 15 by FEESST. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by determining the average Medicare reimbursement for each procedure. We found that the mean reimbursements were \$451.01 (± \$50.55)for MBS and \$321.23 (± \$3.01)for FEESST. The mean reimbursement for FEESST was significantly lower than that for MBS (p<0.0001; Mann-Whitney U test). We conclude that FEESST appears to be more cost-effective than MBS for the inpatient management of dysphagia in patients with head and neck cancer.",

author = "Aviv, \{J. E.\} and Sataloff, \{R. T.\} and M. Cohen and J. Spitzer and G. Ma and R. Bhayani and Close, \{L. G.\}",

year = "2001",

doi = "10.1177/014556130108000818",

language = "English",

volume = "80",

pages = "553--558",

journal = "Ear, Nose and Throat Journal",

issn = "0145-5613",

publisher = "Medquest Communications LLC",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of two types of dysphagia care in head and neck cancer

T2 - A preliminary report

AU - Aviv, J. E.

AU - Sataloff, R. T.

AU - Cohen, M.

AU - Spitzer, J.

AU - Ma, G.

AU - Bhayani, R.

AU - Close, L. G.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - We conducted a prospective, preliminary study to compare the cost-effectiveness of two different instrument-based techniques for diagnosing and managing dysphagia in 30 consecutive hospitalized patients with head and neck cancer. The two techniques are videofluoroscopy via modified barium swallow (MBS) and videoendoscopy via flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST). Medicare was the primary insurer of all patients. Fifteen of these patients had their dysphagia diagnosed and managed by MBS and the other 15 by FEESST. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by determining the average Medicare reimbursement for each procedure. We found that the mean reimbursements were $451.01 (± $50.55)for MBS and $321.23 (± $3.01)for FEESST. The mean reimbursement for FEESST was significantly lower than that for MBS (p<0.0001; Mann-Whitney U test). We conclude that FEESST appears to be more cost-effective than MBS for the inpatient management of dysphagia in patients with head and neck cancer.

AB - We conducted a prospective, preliminary study to compare the cost-effectiveness of two different instrument-based techniques for diagnosing and managing dysphagia in 30 consecutive hospitalized patients with head and neck cancer. The two techniques are videofluoroscopy via modified barium swallow (MBS) and videoendoscopy via flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST). Medicare was the primary insurer of all patients. Fifteen of these patients had their dysphagia diagnosed and managed by MBS and the other 15 by FEESST. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by determining the average Medicare reimbursement for each procedure. We found that the mean reimbursements were $451.01 (± $50.55)for MBS and $321.23 (± $3.01)for FEESST. The mean reimbursement for FEESST was significantly lower than that for MBS (p<0.0001; Mann-Whitney U test). We conclude that FEESST appears to be more cost-effective than MBS for the inpatient management of dysphagia in patients with head and neck cancer.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0034893315

U2 - 10.1177/014556130108000818

DO - 10.1177/014556130108000818

M3 - Article

C2 - 11523474

AN - SCOPUS:0034893315

SN - 0145-5613

VL - 80

SP - 553

EP - 558

JO - Ear, Nose and Throat Journal

JF - Ear, Nose and Throat Journal

IS - 8

ER -

Cost-effectiveness of two types of dysphagia care in head and neck cancer: A preliminary report

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this