Defining the value of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate brachytherapy using time-driven activity-based costing

Is it possible to automate the discovery of process maps for the time-driven activity-based costing method? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this manuscript was to identify the methods used to create process maps for care pathways that utilized the time-driven activity-based costing method.

METHODS

This is a systematic mapping review. Searches were performed in the Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic literature databases from 2004 to September 25, 2022. The included studies reported practical cases from healthcare institutions in all medical fields as long as the time-driven activity-based costing method was employed. We used the time-driven activity-based costing method and analyzed the created process maps and a qualitative approach to identify the main fields.

RESULTS

A total of 412 studies were retrieved, and 70 articles were included. Most of the articles are related to the fields of orthopedics and childbirth-related to hospital surgical procedures. We also identified various studies in the field of oncology and telemedicine services. The main methods for creating the process maps were direct observational practices, complemented by the involvement of multidisciplinary teams through surveys and interviews. Only 33% of the studies used hospital documents or healthcare data records to integrate with the process maps, and in 67% of the studies, the created maps were not validated by specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of process mining techniques effectively automates models generated through clinical pathways. They are applied to the time-driven activity-based costing method, making the process more agile and contributing to the visualization of high degrees of variations encountered in processes, thereby making it possible to enhance and achieve continual improvements in processes.

A primer on time-driven activity-based costing in brachytherapy

Emphasis on value-based healthcare has led to increasing use of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) across medical departments. When applied to brachytherapy, TDABC provides insight into differences in costs across various modes of therapy, the nuances that drive cost including institutional factors and involved personnel, and discrepancies in reimbursement which influence clinical practice. This is especially important with the new alternative payment model (APM) in radiation oncology which offers fixed reimbursement per 90-day episode of care. The TDABC model can thus be utilized to improve efficiency, optimize the role of ancillary staff in treatment planning and care delivery, and implement shorter fraction schedules when clinically appropriate to promote value-based care. Ultimately, application of this methodology could potentiate changes to practice and incentives to improve patient care. In this review, we discuss the utility and limitations of TDABC in the context of existing studies in brachytherapy which have utilized this methodology.

Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Comparison of CT-Guided Versus MR-Guided SBRT

PURPOSE

Magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) has recently become commercially available, offering the opportunity to accurately image and target moving tumors as compared with computed tomography-guided radiation therapy (CTgRT) systems. However, the costs of delivering care with these 2 modalities remain poorly described. With localized unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma as an example, we were able to use time-driven activity-based costing to determine the cost of treatment on linear accelerators with CTgRT compared with MRgRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Process maps, informed via interviews with departmental personnel, were created for each phase of the care cycle. Stereotactic body radiation therapy was delivered at 50 Gy in 5 fractions, either with CTgRT using fiducial placement, deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) with real-time position management, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy, or with MRgRT using real-time tumor gating, DIBH, and static-gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Direct clinical costs were $7,306 for CTgRT and $8,622 for MRgRT comprising personnel costs ($3,752 v $3,603), space and equipment costs ($2,912 v $4,769), and materials costs ($642 v $250). Increased MRgRT costs may be mitigated by forgoing CT simulation ($322 saved) or shortening treatment to 3 fractions ($1,815 saved). Conversely, adaptive treatment with MRgRT would result in an increase in cost of $529 per adaptive treatment.

CONCLUSION

MRgRT offers real-time image guidance, avoidance of fiducial placement, and ability to use adaptive treatments; however, it is 18% more expensive than CTgRT under baseline assumptions. Future studies that elucidate the magnitude of potential clinical benefits of MRgRT are warranted to clarify the value of using this technology.

Cost Comparison of Ultrasound Versus MRI to Diagnose Adolescent Female Patients Presenting with Acute Abdominal/Pelvic Pain Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the cost of ultrasound (US) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using time-driven activity-based costing in adolescent female patients with suspected appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Process maps were created using data from electronic medical record review and patient shadowing for adolescent female patients undergoing US or noncontrast MRI exams of the abdomen and pelvis for suspected appendicitis. Capacity cost rates for all personnel, equipment, facilities, and supplies in each exam pathway were established from institutional accounting data. The cost of each process step was determined by multiplying step-specific capacity cost rates by the mean time required to complete the step. Total pathway costs for US and MRI were computed by summing the costs of all steps through each pathway, and a direct cost comparison was made between the two modalities.

RESULTS

Process maps for US and MRI pathways were generated from 231 and 52 patient encounters, respectively. Patients undergoing US exams followed one of six pathways depending on exam order (abdomen versus pelvis performed first) and whether additional time was needed for bladder filling. Mean total US pathway time was 91 minutes longer than for MRI (US = 166 minutes; MRI = 75 minutes). Total MRI pathway cost was $209.97 compared to a mean US cost of $258.33 (range = $163.21-$293.24).

CONCLUSION

MRI can be a faster and less costly alternative to US for evaluating suspected appendicitis in adolescent female patients. While precise costs will vary by institution, MRI may be a viable and at times preferable alternative to US in this patient population.

Comparison of multiparametric MRI-based and transrectal ultrasound-based preplans with intraoperative ultrasound-based planning for low dose rate interstitial prostate seed implantation

PURPOSE

Transrectal ultrasound images are routinely acquired for low dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy dosimetric preplanning (pTRUS), although diagnostic multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) may serve this purpose as well. We compared the predictive abilities of TRUS vs MRI relative to intraoperative TRUS (iTRUS) to assess the role of mpMRI in brachytherapy preplanning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on 32 patients who underwent iTRUS-guided prostate LDR brachytherapy as either mono- or combination therapy. 56.3% had pTRUS-only volume studies and 43.7% had both 3T-mpMRI and pTRUS preplanning. MRI was used for preplanning and its image fusion with iTRUS was also used for intraoperative guidance of seed placement. Differences in gland volume, seed number, and activity and procedure time were examined, as well as the identification of lesions suspicious for tumor foci. Pearson correlation coefficient and Fisher's Z test were used to estimate associations between continuous measures.

RESULTS

There was good correlation of planning volumes between iTRUS and either pTRUS or MRI (r = 0.89, r = 0.77), not impacted by the addition of hormonal therapy (P = 0.65, P = 0.33). Both consistently predicted intraoperative seed number (r = 0.87, r = 0.86). MRI/TRUS fusion did not significantly increase surgical or anesthesia time (P = 0.10, P = 0.46). mpMRI revealed suspicious focal lesions in 11 of 14 cases not visible on pTRUS, that when correlated with histopathology, were incorporated into the plan.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to pTRUS, MRI yielded reliable preplanning measures, supporting the role of MRI-only LDR treatment planning. mpMRI carries numerous diagnostic, staging and preplanning advantages that facilitate better patient selection and delivery of novel dose escalation and targeted therapy, with no additional surgical or anesthesia time. Prospective studies assessing its impact on treatment planning and delivery can serve to establish mpMRI as the standard of care in LDR prostate brachytherapy planning.

Defining the Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscope Reprocessing Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing

PURPOSE

Careful decontamination and sterilization of reusable flexible ureteroscopes used in ureterorenoscopy cases prevent the spread of infectious pathogens to patients and technicians. However, inefficient reprocessing and unavailability of ureteroscopes sent out for repair can contribute to expensive operating room (OR) delays. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was applied to describe the time and costs involved in reprocessing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Direct observation and timing were performed for all steps in reprocessing of reusable flexible ureteroscopes following operative procedures. Estimated times needed for each step by which damaged ureteroscopes identified during reprocessing are sent for repair were characterized through interviews with purchasing analyst staff. Process maps were created for reprocessing and repair detailing individual step times and their variances. Cost data for labor and disposables used were applied to calculate per minute and average step costs.

RESULTS

Ten ureteroscopes were followed through reprocessing. Process mapping for ureteroscope reprocessing averaged 229.0 ± 74.4 minutes, whereas sending a ureteroscope for repair required an estimated 143 minutes per repair. Most steps demonstrated low variance between timed observations. Ureteroscope drying was the longest and highest variance step at 126.5 ± 55.7 minutes and was highly dependent on manual air flushing through the ureteroscope working channel and ureteroscope positioning in the drying cabinet. Total costs for reprocessing totaled $96.13 per episode, including the cost of labor and disposable items.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing TDABC delineates the full spectrum of costs associated with ureteroscope reprocessing and identifies areas for process improvement to drive value-based care. At our institution, ureteroscope drying was one clearly identified target area. Implementing training in ureteroscope drying technique could save up to 2 hours per reprocessing event, potentially preventing expensive OR delays.

The evolution of brachytherapy for prostate cancer

Brachytherapy (BT), using low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent seed implantation or high-dose-rate (HDR) temporary source implantation, is an acceptable treatment option for select patients with prostate cancer of any risk group. The benefits of HDR-BT over LDR-BT include the ability to use the same source for other cancers, lower operator dependence, and - typically - fewer acute irritative symptoms. By contrast, the benefits of LDR-BT include more favourable scheduling logistics, lower initial capital equipment costs, no need for a shielded room, completion in a single implant, and more robust data from clinical trials. Prospective reports comparing HDR-BT and LDR-BT to each other or to other treatment options (such as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or surgery) suggest similar outcomes. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure rates for patients with low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease are >85%, 69-97%, and 63-80%, respectively. Brachytherapy with EBRT (versus brachytherapy alone) is an appropriate approach in select patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease. The 10-year rates of overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer-specific mortality are >85%, <10%, and <5%, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated with HDR-BT and LDR-BT are rare, at <4% in most series, and quality of life is improved in patients who receive brachytherapy compared with those who undergo surgery.