Employer-Perspective Cost Comparison Of Surgical Treatments For Abnormal Uterine Bleeding

Aim: To estimate direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a self-insured employer's perspective. Methods: Employer-sponsored insurance claims data were analyzed to estimate costs owing to absence and short-term disability 1 year following global endometrial ablation (GEA), outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH). Results: Costs for women who had GEA are substantially less than costs for women who had either OPH or IPH, with the difference ranging from approximately $7700 to approximately $10,000 for direct costs and approximately $4200 to approximately $4600 for indirect costs. Women who had GEA missed 21.8-24.0 fewer works days. Conclusion: Study results suggest lower healthcare costs associated with GEA versus OPH or IPH from a self-insured employer perspective.Lay abstract: This study shows lower costs from an employer's perspective for treating abnormal uterine bleeding with global endometrial ablation versus inpatient and outpatient hysterectomy. Total direct and indirect cost savings associated with global endometrial ablation in the year following intervention are estimated to be as much as $15,000. Healthcare providers should be aware that choice about the type of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding impacts a woman's work attendance and the cost burden to her employer.