J. Stephen Jones, MD
McLeod Regional Medical Center, Florence, S.C.
Niki B. Istwan, RN
Department of Clinical Research, Matria Healthcare, Marietta, Ga.
Debbie Jacques, MPH
Department of Clinical Research, Matria Healthcare, Marietta, Ga.
Suzanne K. Coleman, MSc
Department of Clinical Research, Matria Healthcare, Marietta, Ga.
Gary Stanziano, MD
Department of Clinical Research, Matria Healthcare, Marietta, Ga.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To examine neonatal risk and associated nursery costs for infants with delivery following untreated preterm labor at 34, 35, or 36 weeks' gestation, by assessing the incidence of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), and need for ventilatory assistance.

Design: Infants with preterm birth at 34, 35, or 36 weeks were identified from a database of prospectively collected clinical information and pregnancy outcomes of women receiving outpatient preterm-labor management services, in addition to routine prenatal care. Cases of singleton gestations with delivery related to spontaneous preterm labor were analyzed. Data were divided into three groups by gestational week at delivery.

Methodology: Descriptive and statistical methods were used to compare maternal demographics, pregnancy outcome, and nursery costs. A cost model was utilized.

Principal findings: 2849 infants were studied. Risk of NICU admission decreased by 47.4 percent from weeks 34 to 35 and 41.8 percent from weeks 35 to 36. Risk of RDS decreased by 25.4 percent from weeks 34 to 35, and 40.7 percent from weeks 35 to 36. Mean nursery costs per infant delivering at 34, 35, and 36 weeks were $11,439 ± $19,774, $5,796 ± $11,858, and $3,824 ± $9,135, respectively (p<.001).

Conclusion: Rates of NICU admission, RDS, ventilator use, and nursery-related costs decreased significantly with each week gained. The data indicate that benefit is derived in prolonging pregnancy beyond 34 weeks.

Key words: preterm delivery; preterm labor; prematurity; neonatal morbidity; respiratory-distress syndrome; cost effectiveness; outcomes

Author correspondence:
J. Stephen Jones, MD
Director, McLeod Maternal-Fetal Medicine
McLeod Medical Park-East
901 E. Cheves St., Ste. 430
Florence, SC 29506
E-mail: jonescpob@aol.com

This study was undertaken without external financial support for the participating authors and institutions.

Managed Care’s Top Ten Articles of 2016

There’s a lot more going on in health care than mergers (Aetna-Humana, Anthem-Cigna) creating huge players. Hundreds of insurers operate in 50 different states. Self-insured employers, ACA public exchanges, Medicare Advantage, and Medicaid managed care plans crowd an increasingly complex market.

Major health care players are determined to make health information exchanges (HIEs) work. The push toward value-based payment alone almost guarantees that HIEs will be tweaked, poked, prodded, and overhauled until they deliver on their promise. The goal: straight talk from and among tech systems.

They bring a different mindset. They’re willing to work in teams and focus on the sort of evidence-based medicine that can guide health care’s transformation into a system based on value. One question: How well will this new generation of data-driven MDs deal with patients?

The surge of new MS treatments have been for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. There’s hope for sufferers of a different form of MS. By homing in on CD20-positive B cells, ocrelizumab is able to knock them out and other aberrant B cells circulating in the bloodstream.

A flood of tests have insurers ramping up prior authorization and utilization review. Information overload is a problem. As doctors struggle to keep up, health plans need to get ahead of the development of the technology in order to successfully manage genetic testing appropriately.

Having the data is one thing. Knowing how to use it is another. Applying its computational power to the data, a company called RowdMap puts providers into high-, medium-, and low-value buckets compared with peers in their markets, using specific benchmarks to show why outliers differ from the norm.
Competition among manufacturers, industry consolidation, and capitalization on me-too drugs are cranking up generic and branded drug prices. This increase has compelled PBMs, health plan sponsors, and retail pharmacies to find novel ways to turn a profit, often at the expense of the consumer.
The development of recombinant DNA and other technologies has added a new dimension to care. These medications have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many of the other 80 or so autoimmune diseases. But they can be budget busters and have a tricky side effect profile.

Shelley Slade
Vogel, Slade & Goldstein

Hub programs have emerged as a profitable new line of business in the sales and distribution side of the pharmaceutical industry that has got more than its fair share of wheeling and dealing. But they spell trouble if they spark collusion, threaten patients, or waste federal dollars.

More companies are self-insuring—and it’s not just large employers that are striking out on their own. The percentage of employers who fully self-insure increased by 44% in 1999 to 63% in 2015. Self-insurance may give employers more control over benefit packages, and stop-loss protects them against uncapped liability.