Sounds like this is an argument for increased health insurance coverage of testosterone therapy. The abstract says:
In this retrospective cohort study using a large US administrative claims database, adult males with primary or secondary HG were selected from 2010-2014. Non-HG controls had no evidence of HG from 2009-2014 and were matched on age, insurance type and geographic region to HG patients. Outcomes included absenteeism and associated costs. HG (vs non-HG) patients had a significant 15% increase in non-recreational absenteeism hours and associated costs ($2,152 vs $1,172) post-index after adjusting for pre-period differences.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
