0068 Impact of OSA Therapy on Healthcare Economics: Actuarial Analysis of OSA Prevalence, Therapy Adherence, Co-morbidity, and Costs in a Large CMS Population Cohort

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Abstract Introduction Research studying the economics of OSA therapy faces confounds including the prevalence of undiagnosed OSA, rate of diagnosed patients declining therapy, spectrum of treatment adherence, and effects of concurrent co-morbidity. We provide an actuarial analysis to study the economic impact of OSA therapy, accounting for these confounds, using the 2016-2018 Medicare 5% LDS Analytical File, a random sample of Medicare Claims containing approximately 2.9 million patients/year, resulting in N=2,001,538 eligible Fee-For-Service patients excluding managed care patients and incomplete data. Methods We segmented the study population into three cohorts and three 12-month time-periods. The cohorts analyzed were A) patients with OSA diagnosis and >12 months treatment, B) patients with OSA and <12 months treatment, and C) patients with OSA diagnosis who never received treatment, resulting in 1,351,838 patient-months. We analyzed the healthcare costs in each cohort in the year before treatment, the first year of treatment, and following treatment year. We applied actuarial risk adjustment within each cohort and time-period to provide a risk-adjusted cost comparison. Results were analyzed cross-sectionally given zero-to-seven co-morbidities among obesity, hypertension, type-II diabetes, depression, COPD, CHF, and/or prior stroke, facility-vs-home testing, and with-or-without surgical procedures. Results The average per-patient-per-month (PPPM) total medical spending was highest in the diagnosed-but-never-treated cohort-C ($1,375), second highest in <12-months treatment cohort-B ($1,005), and lowest in >12-months treatment cohort-A ($983). In both cohorts that started therapy, average/quantile costs decreased from pre-treatment year to post-treatment year, and from the first-to-second year on therapy. Compared to no-therapy cohort-C, costs were 29% lower in cohort-A and 27% lower in cohort-B. Among co-morbid, 75th quartile of cost members, we observed similar differences (18% and 16%) but larger absolute dollars. Patients undergoing surgical procedures had higher costs but lower spend reduction in initial and following year of therapy (22% and 5%). Conclusion We observed significant differences in cost between OSA patients that started treatment versus those that did not, and those differences further increased the year following therapy onset. These findings imply that receiving treatment for OSA reduces a patients overall medical spend. In terms of mean cost, the >12-month and <12-month cohorts costs fell in both follow-up treatment years. Support (If Any)