Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Mar;4(2):115-22. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.81. Epub 2014 Dec 12.

Comparison of direct and indirect costs of abnormal uterine bleeding treatment with global endometrial ablation and hysterectomy.

Author information

1
Truven Health Analytics, 150 Cambridge Park Drive, 2nd Floor, Cambridge, MA 02140, USA.

Abstract

AIM:

The objective was to compare abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) direct healthcare costs and indirect work absence or short-term disability costs associated with treatment with second-generation global endometrial ablation (GEA) or hysterectomy.

METHODS:

Women aged 30-55 years with AUB who underwent GEA or hysterectomy during 2006-2010 were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan(®) Commercial and Health and Productivity Management databases.

RESULTS & CONCLUSION:

Two-thirds (66.3%) of the 61,602 study patients underwent GEA compared with hysterectomy (33.7%). Hysterectomy patients had higher treatment costs (US$12,147 vs 5837; p < 0.001), higher annual absenteeism costs (US$7543 vs 5621; p < 0.001), were four-times more likely to have a short-term disability claim (84 vs 21%; p < 0.001) and had higher per-patient short-term disability costs (US$5744 vs 1361; p < 0.001). Overall hysterectomy costs were approximately twice those of GEA.

KEYWORDS:

AUB; abnormal uterine bleeding; endometrial ablation; hysterectomy; menorrhagia

PMID:
25496448
DOI:
10.2217/cer.14.81
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center