Comparison of Healthcare Costs Among Commercially Insured Women in the United States Who Underwent Hysteroscopic Sterilization Versus Laparoscopic Bilateral Tubal Ligation Sterilization

Abstract

Background:

This study evaluated healthcare costs of index procedures and during a 6-month follow-up of women who had hysteroscopic sterilization (HS) versus laparoscopic bilateral tubal ligation (LBTL).

Materials and Methods:

Women (18–49 years) with claims for HS and LBTL procedures were identified from the MarketScan commercial claims database (January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2012) and placed into separate cohorts. Demographics, characteristics, index procedure costs, and 6-month total healthcare costs and sterilization procedure-related costs were compared. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine the impact of HS versus LBTL on costs.

Results:

Among the study population, 12,031 had HS (mean age: 37.0 years) and 7286 had LBTL (mean age: 35.8 years). The majority (80.9%) who had HS underwent the procedure in a physician's office setting. Fewer women who had HS versus LBTL received the procedure in an inpatient setting (0.5% vs. 2.1%), an ambulatory surgical center setting (5.0% vs. 23.8%), or a hospital outpatient setting (13.4% vs. 71.9%). Mean total cost for the index sterilization procedure was lower for HS than for LBTL ($3964 vs. $5163, p < 0.0001). During the 6-month follow-up, total medical and prescription costs for all causes ($7093 vs. $7568, p < 0.0001) and sterilization procedure-related costs ($4971 vs. $5407, p < 0.0001) were lower for women who had HS versus LBTL. Multivariable regression results confirmed that costs were lower for women who had HS versus LBTL.

Conclusions:

Among commercially insured women in the United States, HS versus LBTL is associated with lower average costs for the index procedure and lower total healthcare and procedure-related costs during 6 months after the sterilization procedure.