FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3152146404> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3152146404 endingPage "S29" @default.
• W3152146404 startingPage "S29" @default.
• W3152146404 abstract "Abstract Introduction Value is a prominent issue in healthcare measured by the clinical outcomes of good medical practices relative to the literal or figurative costs of care. As a result, cost effectiveness has become an essential measure when assessing new technologies in burn care. To help providers evaluate cost-effectiveness, the BEACON model was developed in 2018 using National Burn Repository (NBR) data. While the NBR data has tremendous value portraying a cumulative picture of burn care, it lacks resolution for new innovations such as autologous skin cell suspension (ASCS). In BEACON, ASCS was shown to reduce costs associated with the current treatment of severe burns, where this cost-saving was attributed to reductions in length of stay (LOS), the number of operations, the donor site size, and associated wound care. Our study examines the efficacy of the BEACON model by performing a multicenter real-world data (RWD) analysis of primary cost-savings measures of reduced LOS for patients treated with ASCS vs. standard of care (SOC). Methods De-identified electronic medical record data was collected over a 20-month period (1/2019 to 8/2020) from 43 burn centers in 14 states. Patients with burn injuries treated with ASCS were matched by age, gender, TBSA, and comorbidities to patients treated by current SOC treatment. Injury severity was calculated as categorical data with intervals: &lt; 10%, 10–19%, 20–29%, 30–39%, and 40–49% TBSA. Co-morbidities were also assessed to facilitate a 1:1 comparison of patients across the two cohorts. Cost analysis was determined prior peer-reviewed literature in burn care. Results A total of 2,438 patients were reviewed, and 162 were used in the matched cohort analysis (n=81 in each cohort). In these patients, 68% had &lt; 20% TBSA. When comparing patients matched on co-morbidities, burn %TBSA/extent, age, and gender, ASCS patients had a shorter LOS by 4.1 days. At an assumed cost of $6,795 per day, these differences in LOS produced a savings of over $28,000 in hospital bed costs alone per ASCS patient versus SOC. LOS was the same or shorter for ASCS patients in 63% of cases with an average reduction of 4.1 days resulting in an overall savings of $2,269,530 for ASCS-treated patients compared to SOC. Conclusions Our study is the largest RWD cost-effectiveness analysis of ASCS vs SOC. This analysis confirms the BEACON model with savings primarily originating from reducing LOS, even for small burns with 68% of patients having burns less than 20% TBSA." @default.
• W3152146404 created "2021-04-13" @default.
• W3152146404 creator A5011909665 @default.
• W3152146404 creator A5031302291 @default.
• W3152146404 creator A5070118845 @default.
• W3152146404 creator A5078626931 @default.
• W3152146404 date "2021-04-01" @default.
• W3152146404 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W3152146404 title "38 Cost-effectiveness of Autologous Cell Harvesting Device for the Treatment of Burns Requiring Hospitalization: An Economic Evaluation Using Real World Data" @default.
• W3152146404 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/jbcr/irab032.042" @default.
• W3152146404 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3152146404 type Work @default.
• W3152146404 sameAs 3152146404 @default.
• W3152146404 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3152146404 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3152146404 hasAuthorship W3152146404A5011909665 @default.
• W3152146404 hasAuthorship W3152146404A5031302291 @default.
• W3152146404 hasAuthorship W3152146404A5070118845 @default.
• W3152146404 hasAuthorship W3152146404A5078626931 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C194828623 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C195910791 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C3019080777 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C50522688 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C545542383 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C112930515 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C141071460 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C160735492 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C162324750 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C194828623 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C195910791 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C3019080777 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C50522688 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C545542383 @default.
• W3152146404 hasConceptScore W3152146404C71924100 @default.
• W3152146404 hasIssue "Supplement_1" @default.
• W3152146404 hasLocation W31521464041 @default.
• W3152146404 hasOpenAccess W3152146404 @default.
• W3152146404 hasPrimaryLocation W31521464041 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W185286426 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2087877781 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2147898173 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2233881403 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2334457577 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2418547651 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2770672245 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2886039406 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2886244250 @default.
• W3152146404 hasRelatedWork W2953883753 @default.
• W3152146404 hasVolume "42" @default.
• W3152146404 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3152146404 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3152146404 magId "3152146404" @default.
• W3152146404 workType "article" @default.