MR-001 is an investigational, at-home rehabilitation system designed to improve walking and ambulation status in adults with chronic stroke. A budget impact model (BIM) was developed to evaluate the economic impact associated with the reimbursement of MR-001 from a US payer perspective.

The Cue COVID-19 test is an at-home molecular nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) that detects the RNA of SARS-CoV-2 using a nasal swab sample, with an accuracy rate of 98.9%. This study aims to understand how clinicians who treat immunocompromised (IC) patients view the Cue COVID-19 test, how the Cue COVID-19 test compares to other COVID-19 tests, and the types of IC patients who would benefit from access to Cue COVID-19 tests. Data for the study were collected using a modified Delphi panel methodology. Two sets of electronic surveys were administered in fall 2022 eliciting the opinions of expert panelists on the value of the Cue COVID-19 test, the IC patient population who should be regularly tested for COVID-19, and recommendations on when and how these patients may be tested. Consensus rules were defined a priori; consensus was defined as agreement by ≥ 75% of the panelists. Expert opinions were anonymously collected from eight oncologists/ hematologists/ immunologists with extensive experience treating IC patients in the US. Consensus was achieved that the Cue COVID-19 test would provide value to all IC patients, and that they would benefit from access to this at-home test. Particularly, the panelists agreed that patients would benefit if they were symptomatic, exposed to COVID-19, undergoing chemotherapy, or have HIV with low CD4 count. Panelists recommended that patients should have access to between 1 and 6 Cue COVID-19 tests per month (average of 2.5 tests/month). The study aims to understand the value of the Cue COVID-19 test for IC patients. Clinicians included on this panel agreed that the Cue COVID-19 test would provide value to IC patients, and that IC patients should have access to between 1 and 6 tests per month (average of 2.5 tests/month), for particular use when symptomatic, exposed to COVID-19, or while undergoing chemotherapy.

The costs of maintaining supplies (including medical devices) can represent up to 40% of a hospital operating budget. Reducing supply chain costs creates a significant savings opportunity for hospitals; however, strategies and value drivers may vary across hospitals, and have not been systematically reported. The objective of this research was to conduct a literature review to identify studies that report on the qualitative or quantitative value of stock-keeping unit (SKU) reduction or product standardization, and the potential impact to the hospital(s).

Air leaks after thoracic surgery are common, and can be associated with an increased risk of clinical complications and a significant economic burden, including increased length of stay and hospital resources. PROGEL™ Pleural Air Leak Sealant (PROGEL™) is the only FDA-approved sealant to treat intra-operative air leaks. The analyses presented here estimate healthcare utilization, medical costs, and outcomes in patients treated with PROGEL™ as compared to those outcomes associated with the use of other synthetic sealants or fibrin sealants. This was a retrospective analysis of both open and thoracoscopic lung resections including: lobectomy, bilobectomy, segmentectomy, decortication procedures, and wedge resections from the Premier Hospital Database, evaluating the clinical and economic outcomes of patients whose discharge data included ICD-9 codes for these procedures in the inpatient setting. Patients were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) to compare the use of PROGEL™ with other sealants (synthetic and fibrin). Adult patients (18 and older) with a hospitalization discharge between January 2009 and June 2015 were evaluated. Total costs, length of stay, readmissions, and clinical complications were collected. PSM produced cohorts of 3,988 for PROGEL™, and 3,639 for other sealants. Utilization of PROGEL™ was associated with an adjusted all-cause mean cost savings of $4,062 as compared with other synthetic and fibrin sealants; $31,795 versus $35,858, p<0.001. PROGEL™ was also associated with an adjusted mean length of stay reduction of 1.35 days as compared with other synthetic and fibrin sealants (9.8 versus 11.2 days, p<0.001), and reduced risk of moderate or low infection. After controlling for patient characteristics, risk factors, and comorbidities, as well as hospital characteristics and surgical procedures, a statistically significant lower healthcare utilization and hospital cost was found to be associated with the use of PROGEL™ compared to the use of other synthetic or fibrin sealants.

Surgical bleeding remains prevalent and associated with substantial burden. Such bleeding can be more difficult to manage in certain surgeries (e.g., liver). Hemostats with a fibrinogen, thrombin and patch component may be especially beneficial for problematic bleeding types; however, direct comparative data are limited. This study indirectly compared the hemostats EVARREST and TachoSil. A structured literature search identified studies of fibrin sealants combined with use of a pad, patch, fleece or sponge, for surgical bleeding. The search was restricted to RCTs, 2000 onward, studies including standard of care (SoC) and time to hemostasis (TTH). EVARREST (4 trials) and TachoSil (6 trials) were identified as the comparators. Pair-wise meta-analyses were completed using a random-effects model for hemostat vs. SoC. An adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using Bucher methodology and ITC software (Wells, 2009) for calculating the mean difference (MD) in TTH between EVARREST and TachoSil with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Mean TTH was analysed as it is a well-accepted, recommended measure. Typically, TTH measurements began at either 3 or 4 minutes. SoC was used as the ‘anchor’ to perform the indirect comparison and consisted of either conventional methods or topical hemostats. Indirect comparisons were completed for all surgery types and a liver surgery subgroup. A total of 894 patients were assessed. Across surgery types, the adjusted indirect comparison demonstrated EVARREST reduced mean TTH by 1.15 minutes compared to TachoSil (MD: -1.15; 95%CI: -3.29, 0.99), however, this difference was not statistically significant. In the subgroup of liver surgical bleeding, EVARREST significantly reduced mean TTH by 2.73 minutes (MD: -2.73; 95%CI: -4.48, -0.981). This analysis suggests EVARREST may provide better hemostasis than TachoSil, particularly in liver surgical bleeding. Caution must be taken in interpreting results given some patient differences. A head-to-head trial comparison may be necessary to confirm differences between products.