2 APPROACHES TO COMPARING HOSPITAL CHARGES BETWEEN CADAVERIC RENAL-TRANSPLANT PATIENTS WHO RECEIVED ORTHOCLONE OKT(R)3 STERILE SOLUTION OR ATGAM(R) STERILE SOLUTION FOR INDUCTION THERAPY
Jc. Schommer et al., 2 APPROACHES TO COMPARING HOSPITAL CHARGES BETWEEN CADAVERIC RENAL-TRANSPLANT PATIENTS WHO RECEIVED ORTHOCLONE OKT(R)3 STERILE SOLUTION OR ATGAM(R) STERILE SOLUTION FOR INDUCTION THERAPY, Clinical therapeutics, 17(4), 1995, pp. 749-769
The objectives of this study were: (1) to compare total hospital charg
es for a sample of cadaveric renal transplant patients categorized acc
ording to the type of induction therapy used (Orthoclone OKT(R)3 Steri
le Solution or Atgam(R) Sterile Solution); (2) to compare specific cha
rge categories between the two groups; and (3) to examine the relation
ship between charges and a set of independent variables. A retrospecti
ve review was conducted of hospital charges associated with a sample o
f renal transplant patients. The overall sample for this study compris
ed 510 patient discharges from 22 hospitals in the United States. Comp
arisons between the OKT3 and Atgam groups were made for total and spec
ific charge categories using two different approaches to help control
variations in charges that were not related to the type of induction t
herapy used. The first approach consisted of t test or chi-square comp
arisons between the groups for subsets of observations that had been i
dentified in a stepwise fashion. These judgment samples were defined t
o remove sources of variation in charges other than those resulting fr
om the type of induction therapy selected. The second approach used mu
ltiple linear regression analysis to help statistically control variat
ion in charges from other sources. The results showed that higher drug
charges in the Atgam group were offset by lower charges in other cate
gories (P < 0.05). These findings suggest that hospital formulary comm
ittees should consider all relevant costs, not just drug acquisition c
osts, when selecting products. However, further investigation is warra
nted to explore differences in charges due to: (1) between-hospital va
riation; (2) patients' severity of illness before receiving induction
therapy; and (3) differences in side-effect profiles for the two induc
tion therapies.