Journal article
Cost-effectiveness of Two Types of Dysphagia Care in Head and Neck Cancer: A Preliminary Report
Ear, nose, & throat journal, v 80(8), pp 553-558
Aug 2001
PMID: 11523474
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.
Metrics
2 Record Views
27 citations in Scopus
Details
- Title
- Cost-effectiveness of Two Types of Dysphagia Care in Head and Neck Cancer: A Preliminary Report
- Creators
- Jonathan E. Aviv - NewYork–Presbyterian HospitalRobert T. Sataloff - Thomas Jefferson UniversityManderly Cohen - NewYork–Presbyterian HospitalJaclyn Spitzer - NewYork–Presbyterian HospitalGuoguang Ma - NewYork–Presbyterian HospitalRajendra Bhayani - NewYork–Presbyterian HospitalLanny G. Close - NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital
- Publication Details
- Ear, nose, & throat journal, v 80(8), pp 553-558
- Publisher
- Sage
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- College of Medicine
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-0034893315
- Other Identifier
- 991019312423504721