MyUroflow Home Uroflowmetry Cost and Time Analysis
Ananya Tripathi MS3*, Timothy W. Brandt M.D., Carolyn A. Salter, M.D.,Jonathan T. Wingate, M.D.:
Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA
(Presentation to be made by Ananya Tripathi)
Objectives: Multiple advancements in technology have made diagnostic testing in medicine more patient centric and accessible, while providing more robust data collection. These technologies can limit both time and cost to the patient and clinic if applied to the right patient population in the proper clinical setting. In our clinic, we have employed a novel uroflowmetry test which utilizes the patient’s smart phone for at-home testing. The MyUroflow application is FDA (510k) approved for adult males and is provided to our patients at no cost to them. All that is required is an Android or Apple smartphone. The focus of this analysis is to evaluate the potential cost savings and improved access to care by employing this technology at Madigan ArmyMedical Center (MAMC).
Materials and Methods: Retrospective data was collected in men 18 years or older who required uroflowmetry testing at MAMC. We collected data ontime required for in-clinic uroflowmetry testing over a 6-month period, prior toutilization of the app (1Jun2022-1DEC22), and from implementation of the app(12DEC2022-11OCT2023). Time analysis was completed by evaluatingappointment slots dedicated to in-clinic uroflowmetry, which take 30-minute technician appointments and compared to the number of visits avoided usingthe app. Cost analysis was conducted using Current Procedural Terminology(CPT) code 51741 (Complex Uroflowmetry using calibrated electronic equipment) and regional reimbursements for both in and out of network ($26,$150) in the Tacoma area. The main outcomes evaluated were reducedtechnician visits and potential cost savings.
Results: Six months prior to the utilization of the app, there were 179 in-clinic uroflowmetry appointments completed. A total of 89.5 clinic hours were used during this time for uroflowmetry. Since the implementation of the app, 107men underwent uroflowmetry testing using MyUroflow with a total appointment time savings of 53.5 hrs. This would be a total of in-network savings of $2,782and out of network savings of $16,050.
Conclusions: MyUroflow can save clinic time and resources while providing greater access to care to our patients. The results of this study demonstrate a significant reduction in technician visits after implementation of the app. Cost savings are modest but do not reflect the true savings, since of the 107 patients using the app, the majority have completed multiple voids (average31) and not just a single void. The use of MyUroflow in resource-sparse locations without in-clinic uroflowmetry is another application of this noveltechnology.
Source of Funding: None
