Inpatient costs and predictors of costs in the psychosomatic treatment of anorexia nervosa. Int J Eat Disord
ABSTRACT In German inpatient psychosomatics per diem lump sums will be introduced as reimbursement rates by 2013. It was the aim to calculate total inpatient costs per case for the psychosomatic treatment of patients with anorexia nervosa and to identify cost predictors.
The sample comprised of 127 inpatients. Cost calculation was executed from the hospital's perspective, mainly using microcosting. Medical records provided data on patient characteristics and individual resource use. Two generalized linear models with gamma distribution and log link function were estimated to determine cost predictors by means of demographic data, comorbidities, and body-mass-index at admission.
Inpatient costs amounted to 4,647 €/6,831 US$ per case (standard deviation 3,714 €/5,460 US$).The admission BMI and "Disorders of Adult Personality and Behavior" were significant cost predictors (p < 0.05).
The formation of patient groups within the diagnosis anorexia nervosa should be oriented towards the determined cost predictors.
- SourceAvailable from: Jörn von Wietersheim[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Eating disorders are of major significance both in clinical medicine and in society at large. Anorexia and bulimia nervosa almost exclusively afflict young persons, severely impairing their physical and mental health. The peak ages for these diseases are in late adolescence and young adulthood; patients therefore suffer setbacks both in school and/or in their occupational careers. This scientifically based S3 guideline was developed with the intention of improving the treatment of eating disorders and motivating future research in this area. The existing national and international guidelines on the three types of eating disorders were synoptically compared, the literature on the subject was systematically searched, and meta-analyses on bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder were carried out. 15 consensus conferences were held, as a result of which 44 evidence-based recommendations were issued. Anorexia and bulimia nervosa are diagnosed according to the ICD-10 criteria (International Classification of Diseases), binge-eating disorder according to those of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Psychotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for all three disorders, and cognitive behavioral therapy is the form of psychotherapy best supported by the available evidence. The administration of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) can be recommended as a flanking measure in the treatment of bulimia nervosa only. The evidence does not support any type of pharmacotherapy for anorexia nervosa or binge-eating disorder. Bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder can usually be treated on an outpatient basis, as long as they are no more than moderately severe; full-fledged anorexia nervosa is generally an indication for in-hospital treatment. This guideline contains evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of eating disorders. If strictly implemented, it should result in improved care for the affected patients.Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 10/2011; 108(40):678-85. DOI:10.3238/arztebl.2011.0678 · 3.52 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To review cost-of-illness studies (COIs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of eating disorders (EDs) and to describe their methodological quality. A systematic literature search was done. Search results passed through a selection process, included studies were classified as COIs, CEAs, or "other cost studies" (OCS). Costs were inflated and converted to 2008 US$ purchasing power parities (PPP). Quality criteria were developed and applied to each study. Five COI, two CEA, and eleven "OCS" were reviewed. Most studies focused on anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. Annual costs per patient ranged from 1,288 to 8,042 US$-PPP. All interventions, investigated in CEA, were more effective and less costly than the alternative treatments. The number of publications investigating costs in EDs has increased recently. However, no COI provided a comprehensive estimate of costs, and the comparability of CEA was limited. Nonetheless, the results indicate that the costs arising from EDs are substantial.International Journal of Eating Disorders 05/2012; 45(4):476-91. DOI:10.1002/eat.20977 · 3.13 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Various western countries are focusing on the introduction of reimbursement based on diagnosis-related groups (DRG) in inpatient mental health. The aim of this study was to analyze if psychosomatic inpatients treated for eating disorders could be reimbursed by a common per diem rate. Inclusion criteria for patient selection (n=256) were (1) a main diagnosis of anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN) or eating disorder-related obesity (OB), (2) minimum length of hospital stay of 2days, (3) and treatment at Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Germany during the years 2006-2009. Cost calculation was executed from the hospital's perspective, mainly using micro-costing. Generalized linear models with Gamma error distribution and log link function were estimated with per diem costs as dependent variable, clinical and patient variables as well as treatment year as independent variables. Mean costs/case for AN amounted to 5,251€, 95% CI [4407-6095], for BN to 3,265€, 95% CI [2921-3610] and for OB to 3,722€, 95% CI [4407-6095]. Mean costs/day over all patients amounted to 208€, 95% CI [198-218]. The diagnosis AN predicted higher costs in comparison to OB (p=.0009). A co-morbid personality disorder (p=.0442), every one-unit increase in BMI in OB patients (p=.0256), every one-unit decrease in BMI in AN patients (p=.0002) and every additional life year in BN patients (p=.0455) predicted increased costs. We see a need for refinements to take into account considerable variations in treatment costs between patients with eating disorders due to diagnosis, BMI, co-morbid personality disorder and age.Journal of psychosomatic research 11/2012; 73(5):383-90. DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.09.001 · 2.74 Impact Factor