Cargando…
A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening
BACKGROUND: Hearing loss is a high prevalence condition among older adults, is associated with higher-than-average risk for poor health outcomes and quality of life, and is a public health concern to individuals, families, communities, professionals, governments, and policy makers. Although low-cost...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233354/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35751122 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00360-5 |
_version_ | 1784735745167065088 |
---|---|
author | Dubno, Judy R. Majumder, Pranab Bettger, Janet Prvu Dolor, Rowena J. Eifert, Victoria Francis, Howard W. Pieper, Carl F. Schulz, Kristine A. Silberberg, Mina Smith, Sherri L. Walker, Amy R. Witsell, David L. Tucci, Debara L. |
author_facet | Dubno, Judy R. Majumder, Pranab Bettger, Janet Prvu Dolor, Rowena J. Eifert, Victoria Francis, Howard W. Pieper, Carl F. Schulz, Kristine A. Silberberg, Mina Smith, Sherri L. Walker, Amy R. Witsell, David L. Tucci, Debara L. |
author_sort | Dubno, Judy R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Hearing loss is a high prevalence condition among older adults, is associated with higher-than-average risk for poor health outcomes and quality of life, and is a public health concern to individuals, families, communities, professionals, governments, and policy makers. Although low-cost hearing screening (HS) is widely available, most older adults are not asked about hearing during health care visits. A promising approach to addressing unmet needs in hearing health care is HS in primary care (PC) clinics; most PC providers (PCPs) do not inquire about hearing loss. However, no cost assessment of HS in community PC settings has been conducted in the United States. Thus, this study conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of HS using results from a pragmatic clinic trial that compared three HS protocols that differed in the level of support and encouragement provided by the PC office and the PCPs to older adults during their routine visits. Two protocols included HS at home (one with PCP encouragement and one without) and one protocol included HS in the PC office. METHODS: Direct costs of the HS included costs of: (1) educational materials about hearing loss, (2) PCP educational and encouragement time, and (3) access to the HS system. Indirect costs for in-office HS included cost of space and minimal staff time. Costs were tracked and modeled for each phase of care during and following the HS, including completion of a diagnostic assessment and follow-up with the recommended treatment plan. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the average cost per patient is highest in the patient group who completed the HS during their clinic visit, but the average cost per patient who failed the HS is by far the lowest in that group, due to the higher failure rate, that is, rate of identification of patients with suspected hearing loss. Estimated benefits of HS in terms of improvements in quality of life were also far greater when patients completed the HS during their clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Providing HS to older adults during their PC visit is cost-effective and accrues greater estimated benefits in terms of improved quality of life. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov (Registration Identification Number: NCT02928107). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9233354 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92333542022-06-26 A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening Dubno, Judy R. Majumder, Pranab Bettger, Janet Prvu Dolor, Rowena J. Eifert, Victoria Francis, Howard W. Pieper, Carl F. Schulz, Kristine A. Silberberg, Mina Smith, Sherri L. Walker, Amy R. Witsell, David L. Tucci, Debara L. Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: Hearing loss is a high prevalence condition among older adults, is associated with higher-than-average risk for poor health outcomes and quality of life, and is a public health concern to individuals, families, communities, professionals, governments, and policy makers. Although low-cost hearing screening (HS) is widely available, most older adults are not asked about hearing during health care visits. A promising approach to addressing unmet needs in hearing health care is HS in primary care (PC) clinics; most PC providers (PCPs) do not inquire about hearing loss. However, no cost assessment of HS in community PC settings has been conducted in the United States. Thus, this study conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of HS using results from a pragmatic clinic trial that compared three HS protocols that differed in the level of support and encouragement provided by the PC office and the PCPs to older adults during their routine visits. Two protocols included HS at home (one with PCP encouragement and one without) and one protocol included HS in the PC office. METHODS: Direct costs of the HS included costs of: (1) educational materials about hearing loss, (2) PCP educational and encouragement time, and (3) access to the HS system. Indirect costs for in-office HS included cost of space and minimal staff time. Costs were tracked and modeled for each phase of care during and following the HS, including completion of a diagnostic assessment and follow-up with the recommended treatment plan. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the average cost per patient is highest in the patient group who completed the HS during their clinic visit, but the average cost per patient who failed the HS is by far the lowest in that group, due to the higher failure rate, that is, rate of identification of patients with suspected hearing loss. Estimated benefits of HS in terms of improvements in quality of life were also far greater when patients completed the HS during their clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: Providing HS to older adults during their PC visit is cost-effective and accrues greater estimated benefits in terms of improved quality of life. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov (Registration Identification Number: NCT02928107). BioMed Central 2022-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9233354/ /pubmed/35751122 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00360-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Dubno, Judy R. Majumder, Pranab Bettger, Janet Prvu Dolor, Rowena J. Eifert, Victoria Francis, Howard W. Pieper, Carl F. Schulz, Kristine A. Silberberg, Mina Smith, Sherri L. Walker, Amy R. Witsell, David L. Tucci, Debara L. A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title | A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title_full | A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title_fullStr | A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title_full_unstemmed | A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title_short | A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
title_sort | pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233354/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35751122 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-022-00360-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dubnojudyr apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT majumderpranab apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT bettgerjanetprvu apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT dolorrowenaj apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT eifertvictoria apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT francishowardw apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT piepercarlf apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT schulzkristinea apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT silberbergmina apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT smithsherril apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT walkeramyr apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT witselldavidl apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT tuccidebaral apragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT dubnojudyr pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT majumderpranab pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT bettgerjanetprvu pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT dolorrowenaj pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT eifertvictoria pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT francishowardw pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT piepercarlf pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT schulzkristinea pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT silberbergmina pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT smithsherril pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT walkeramyr pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT witselldavidl pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening AT tuccidebaral pragmaticclinicaltrialofhearingscreeninginprimarycareclinicscosteffectivenessofhearingscreening |