Employer-perspective cost comparison of surgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding

1Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: To estimate direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a self-insured employer's perspective. Methods: Employer-sponsored insurance claims data were analyzed to estimate costs owing to absence and short-term disability 1 year following global endometrial ablation (GEA), outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH). Results: Costs for women who had GEA are substantially less than costs for women who had either OPH or IPH, with the difference ranging from approximately $7700 to approximately $10,000 for direct costs and approximately $4200 to approximately $4600 for indirect costs. Women who had GEA missed 21.8-24.0 fewer works days. Conclusion: Study results suggest lower healthcare costs associated with GEA versus OPH or IPH from a self-insured employer perspective.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Miller, J. D., Bonafede, M. M., Pohlman, S. K., Cholkeri-Singh, A., & Troeger, K. A. (2020). Employer-perspective cost comparison of surgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, 9(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer-2019-0102

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free