Healthcare utilization and costs following molecular diagnostic testing among patients with vaginitis
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: Vaginitis and other vaginal discharge syndromes lead to high healthcare utilization. Molecular tests like syndromic multiplex real-time (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based tests are highly sensitive and specific at diagnosing the infectious causes of vaginitis. This study compared the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and direct all-cause healthcare costs among patients with vaginitis in the US receiving next-day syndromic multiplex RT-PCR tests with those receiving other PCR tests or no diagnostic test of interest. Patients & methods: This retrospective study utilized claims data from IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database to identify adult patients with a diagnosis for vaginitis (first claim = index) from January 2021 to April 2023, with 6 months of continuous enrollment prior to (baseline) and after index (follow-up). Pairwise comparisons were conducted between RT-PCR and 1:1 propensity matched Other PCR and No Test subcohorts for all-cause HCRU and costs during follow-up. Results: Each of the RT-PCR, Other PCR and No Test subcohorts included 1946 matched patients. Mean(SD) follow-up total cost was significantly lower for the RT-PCR than the No Test subcohort ($5607 [$15,122] vs $6680 [$20,751], p = 0.0023). Mean(SD) overall outpatient and other medical service costs were lower for RT-PCR versus Other PCR (outpatient: $2964 [$9666] vs $3174 [$7113], p = 0.0110; other medical: $1961 [$9244] vs $2099 [$6475], p = 0.0002) and No Test subcohorts (outpatient: $2964 [$9666] vs $4067 [$12,341], p < 0.0001; other medical: $1961 [$9244] vs $2973 [$11,685]; p < 0.0001). A lower proportion had any outpatient service HCRU in RT-PCR versus Other PCR subcohort (92.6% vs 94.2%, p = 0.0349). A lower proportion had any other medical service claim in RT-PCR versus Other PCR (78.3% vs 83.2%, p < 0.0001) and No Test subcohorts (78.3% vs 83.0%, p = 0.0001). Physician office, emergency room (ER), prescription use and costs were similar between the subcohorts. Conclusion: The use of syndromic multiplex RT-PCR diagnostics with next day test results in patients with vaginitis was associated with lower outpatient costs and total healthcare costs than those in the no test cohort over 6 months. These findings indicate that use of syndromic multiplex RT-PCR diagnostics may contribute to improved patient management compared with clinical diagnosis alone.
Plain language summary
Healthcare use and costs in women with vaginitis after diagnostic testing
What is this article about?
•
Vaginitis accounts for over 10 million office visits each year. Time to results from traditional diagnostic testing methods vary from 15 minutes to as long as 7 days.
•
Molecular tests including multiplex real-time (RT)-PCR tests can offer faster and more accurate results, but their economic impact has not been assessed.
What were the results?
•
Adult women with vaginitis who received next-day results from multiplex RT-PCR tests had significantly lower mean total and outpatient costs compared with those who received no test and fewer outpatient services compared with those who did not receive any test.
•
Patients with multiplex RT-PCR also had lower outpatient service costs and lower utilization of outpatient and other medical services than those receiving another PCR test or those who had no diagnostic testing performed.
What do the results mean?
•
Using multiplex RT-PCR tests for diagnosis of vaginitis leads to lower total costs than not using any tests at all. Also, use of RT-PCR tests is associated with lower utilization and costs for any outpatient service compared with other PCR or no tests during the 6 months after diagnosis.
Supplementary Material
File (supplemental material.docx)
- Download
- 30.11 KB
References
1.
Koumans EH, Sternberg M, Bruce C et al. The prevalence of bacterial vaginosis in the United States, 2001–2004; associations with symptoms, sexual behaviors, and reproductive health. Sex. Transm. Dis. 34(11), 864–869 (2007).
2.
Hildebrand JP, Carlson K, Kansagor AT. Vaginitis. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing, FL, USA (2024).
3.
Paladine HL, Desai UA. Vaginitis: diagnosis and treatment. Am. Fam. Physician 97(5), 321–329 (2018).
4.
Brown H, Drexler M. Improving the diagnosis of vulvovaginitis: perspectives to align practice, guidelines, and awareness. Popul. Health Manag. 23(Suppl. 1), S3–S12 (2020).
5.
Benedict K, Singleton AL, Jackson BR, Molinari NAM. Survey of incidence, lifetime prevalence, and treatment of self-reported vulvovaginal candidiasis, United States, 2020. BMC Womens Health. 22(1), 147 (2022).
6.
Abou Chacra L, Fenollar F, Diop K. Bacterial vaginosis: what do we currently know? Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 11, 672429 (2021).
7.
Powell AM, Nyirjesy P. Recurrent vulvovaginitis. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 28(7), 967–976 (2014).
8.
Eckert LO. Clinical practice. Acute vulvovaginitis. N. Engl. J. Med. 355(12), 1244–1252 (2006).
9.
Denning DW, Kneale M, Sobel JD, Rautemaa-Richardson R. Global burden of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis: a systematic review. Lancet Infect. Dis. 18(11), e339–e347 (2018).
10.
Kong AM, Jenkins D, Troeger KA, Kim G, London RS. Diagnostic testing of vaginitis: improving the value of care. Popul. Health Manag. 24(4), 515–524 (2021).
11.
Watkins E, Chow CM, Lingohr-Smith M et al. Treatment patterns and economic burden of bacterial vaginosis among commercially insured women in the USA. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 13(1), e230079 (2024).
12.
CDC. Diseases characterized by vulvovaginal itching, burning, irritation, odor or discharge. (2021). https://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment-guidelines/vaginal-discharge.htm
13.
Hobbs MM, Sena AC. Modern diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis infection. Sex. Transm. Infect. 89(6), 434–438 (2013).
14.
Vieira-Baptista P, Grincevičienė Š, Oliveira C, Fonseca-Moutinho J, Cherey F, Stockdale CK. The International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease Vaginal Wet Mount Microscopy Guidelines: how to perform, applications, and interpretation. J. Low. Genit. Tract. Dis. 25(2), 172–180 (2021).
15.
Amsel R, Totten PA, Spiegel CA, Chen KC, Eschenbach D, Holmes KK. Nonspecific vaginitis. Diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiologic associations. Am. J. Med. 74, 14–22 (1983).
16.
Thomason JL, Gelbart SM, Anderson RJ, Walt AK, Osypowski PJ, Broekhuizen FF. Statistical evaluation of diagnostic criteria for bacterial vaginosis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 162, 155–160 (1990).
17.
Rivers CA, Muzny CA, Schwebke JR. Diagnostic rates differ on the basis of the number of read days with the use of the InPouch culture system for Trichomonas vaginalis screening. J. Clin. Microbiol. 51(11), 3875–3876 (2013).
18.
Simoes JA, Discacciati MG, Brolazo EM, Portugal PM, Dini DV, Dantas MC. Clinical diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 94(1), 28–32 (2006).
19.
Savicheva AM. Molecular testing for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 25(1), 449 (2023).
20.
Schwebke JR, Gaydos CA, Davis T et al. Clinical evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert TV Assay for detection of trichomonas vaginalis with prospectively collected specimens from men and women. J. Clin. Microbiol. 56(2), e01091–17 (2018).
21.
Schwebke JR, Gaydos CA, Nyirjesy P, Paradis S, Kodsi S, Cooper CK. Diagnostic performance of a molecular test versus clinician assessment of vaginitis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 56(6), e00252–18 (2018).
22.
Glasheen WP, Cordier T, Gumpina R, Haugh G, Davis J, Renda A. Charlson Comorbidity Index: ICD-9 Update and ICD-10 Translation. Am. Health Drug Benefits. 12(4), 188–197 (2019).
23.
Teymouri M, Mollazadeh S, Mortazavi H et al. Recent advances and challenges of RT-PCR tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Pathol. Res. Pract. 221, 153443 (2021).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2024 HealthTrackRx, Inc. This work is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Unported License
History
Received: 9 September 2024
Accepted: 5 November 2024
Published online: 29 November 2024
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Healthcare utilization and costs following molecular diagnostic testing among patients with vaginitis. (2024) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.57264/cer-2024-0173
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Jenny Tse, Justin Chen, Liucheng Shi, Mindy M. Cheng, Rebecca Lillis, Aimee M. Near, Prevalence and Accuracy of Empiric Treatment Among Patients With Vaginitis Symptoms in the United States, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000002197, 52, 11, (690-698), (2025).
