Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Primary hyperparathyroidism (HPT) contributes to the onset of many chronic conditions. Although parathyroidectomy is the only definitive treatment, observation remains a valid option. Over a 3-year span, a major health plan was queried for HPT and benign parathyroid neoplasm. Patients with secondary and tertiary HPT, Stage III to V kidney disease, and prior renal transplant were excluded. Patients were divided into: observation (Group 1), parathyroidectomy during the study period (Group 2), and parathyroidectomy before the study group (Group 3), and were compared with a control group of 27,092 adult members without HPT using analysis of variance. The 3-year mean total allowed expenditure for Group One (n = 559), Group Two (n = 93), and Group Three (n = 48) were $21,267, $37,043, and $14,702, respectively. Groups One and Two had significantly higher use than the nonparathyroid group (P < 0.0001), whereas that of Group Three was comparable. Group Two had the highest cost, whereas Group Three had a significantly lower cost than Group One (P 0.0001). Primary hyperparathyroidism is associated with a higher use of healthcare resources. Patients observed incurred a higher allowed expenditure than those with prior parathyroidectomy. Surgical treatment may represent a cost-effective strategy for treatment of hyperparathyroidism, although more comprehensive studies are needed to confirm these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aliabadi‐Wahle et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: