Geographic Variation in Costs of Transsphenoidal Pituitary Surgery in the United States

Is there an association between out-of-pocket hospital costs, quality and care outcomes? A systematic review of contemporary evidence

BACKGROUND

Out of pocket (OOP) costs vary substantially by health condition, procedure, provider, and service location. Evidence of whether this variation is associated with indicators of healthcare quality and/or health outcomes is lacking.

METHODS

The current review aimed to explore whether higher OOP costs translate into better healthcare quality and outcomes for patients in inpatient settings. The review also aimed to identify the population and contextual-level determinants of inpatient out-of-pocket costs. A systematic electronic search of five databases: Scopus, Medline, Psych Info, CINAHL and Embase was conducted between January 2000 to October 2022. Study procedures and reporting complied with PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42022320763).

FINDINGS

A total of nine studies were included in the final review. A variety of quality and health outcomes were examined in the included studies across a range of patient groups and specialities. The scant evidence available and substantial heterogeneity created challenges in establishing the nature of association between OOP costs and healthcare quality and outcomes. Nonetheless, the most consistent finding was no significant association between OOP cost and inpatient quality of care and outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

The review findings overall suggest no beneficial effect of higher OOP costs on inpatient quality of care and health outcomes. Further work is needed to elucidate the determinants of OOP hospital costs.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Medibank Better Health Foundation.

Towards precision medicine for clinically non-functioning pituitary tumours

OBJECTIVE

Clinically non-functioning pituitary tumours (NFPT) are a heterogenous group of neoplasms with diverse outcomes. The purpose of this narrative review was to summarize available data on predictive factors, both in routine practice and research settings.

DESIGN

A literature review was conducted for papers published in peer-reviewed journals, investigating clinical, radiological, pathological and genetic predictive factors in NFPT.

RESULTS

Several clinical and radiological factors have been associated with NFPT recurrence and/or aggressiveness, including larger size and pre-/post-operative growth rates. Application of transcription factor immunohistochemistry has given rise to improved subtype identification, including 'higher-risk' subtypes, in routine clinical practice. Numerous other pathological and genetic biomarkers have demonstrated promise for prognostication in the research setting.

CONCLUSION

NFPT are a heterogenous group of tumours, characterized by diverse presentation, pathogenesis and outcomes. Ongoing refinements in understanding of tumour biology are likely to pave the way to improved integrative prognostication and precision medicine for NFPT.