Incidence of anastomotic leakage using powered circular staplers versus manual circular staplers for left colorectal anastomosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal anastomotic leakage causes severe consequences for patients and healthcare system as it will lead to increased consumption of hospital resources and costs. Technological improvements in anastomotic devices could reduce the incidence of leakage and its economic impact. The aim of the present study was to assess if the use of a new powered circular stapler is cost-effective. METHOD: This observational study included patients undergoing left-sided circular stapled colorectal anastomosis between January 2018 and December 2021. Propensity score matching was carried out to create two comparable groups depending on whether the anastomosis was performed using a manual or powered circular device. The rate of anastomotic leakage, its severity, the consumption of hospital resources, and its cost were the main outcome measures. A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the powered circular stapler versus manual circular staplers was performed. RESULTS: A total of 330 patients were included in the study, 165 in each group. Anastomotic leakage rates were significantly different (p = 0.012): 22 patients (13.3%) in the manual group versus 8 patients (4.8%) in the powered group. The effectiveness of the powered stapler and manual stapler was 98.27% and 93.69%, respectively. The average cost per patient in the powered group was €6238.38, compared with €9700.12 in the manual group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was - €74,915.28 per patient without anastomotic complications. CONCLUSION: The incremental cost of powered circular stapler compared with manual devices was offset by the savings from lowered incidence and cost of management of anastomotic leaks.

Comparative analysis of direct and indirect costs of two minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of renal/ureteral calculi smaller than 2 cm. / Análisis comparativo de costes directos e indirectos de dos técnicas mínimamente invasivas, para el tratamiento de la litiasis renoureteral menor de 2 cm.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a comparative analysis of indirect and direct costs of two minimally invasive techniques (extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) vs. ureteroscopy with holmium laser (URS/RIRS)) for the treatment of renal/ureteral calculi smaller than 2 cm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, comparative, non-randomized study of 84 patients treated for kidney stones smaller than 2 cm between January and December 2016. Of these, 38 (45.67%) were treated with ESWL (18 renal lithiasis and 20 ureteral lithiasis) and 46 (54.32%) with URS/RIRS (22 renal lithiasis and 24 ureteral lithiasis). A total of 19 (41.3%) patients in the URS/RIRS group and 15 (39.5%) patients in the ESWL group were actively working before treatment. The variables analyzed were sex, age, number and size of lithiasis, time (days) off from work due to treatment, estimate of indirect cost due to labor productivity loss and direct treatment costs including follow-up (total number of procedures, ancillary care, visits and diagnostic tests). The 2015 Wage Structure Survey (INE) was used to estimate the indirect cost. In addition, the «Work Productivity and Activity Impairment¼ (WPAI) questionnaire was also used to determine the level of perceived productivity loss. RESULTS: The mean number of sessions until lithiasis resolution was achieved was 2.57 for the ESWL group and 1.04 for the URS. The mean number of days off from work in the URS group was 7.16 days and 3.18 (p = 0.034) in the ESWL group. The total indirect costs resulting from productivity loss were EUR 621.55 and EUR 276.05 for the URS and ESWL, respectively. Direct costs in the ESWL group were EUR 1,382.9 and EUR 2,317.71 in the URS group. The level of work impairment perceived by patients undergoing URS was 18.88% and 21.33% in the ESWL group. The degree of impairment for performing activities of daily living was 24.44% in the URS and 15% in ESWL. CONCLUSIONS: The ESWL technique requires a higher number of sessions for the resolution of kidney stones under 2 cm, but it has a lower impact on total costs and on the perceived degree of affectation.

Health-related quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a Spanish study based on patient reports.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a disease that significantly affects the quality of life and welfare of patients. SLE patients can be classified into multimorbidity levels using Clinical Risk Groups (CRGs) to help to incorporate predictive models of health needs. The goal of this study was to correlate CRGs with health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and costs in SLE patients. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to SLE patients in four hospital centers of the Valencian Community (Spain) between October 2015 and March 2016. The factors studied included HR-QoL (EQ-5D-5L and VAS), disease activity (SLAI/SELENA), damage (SLICC/ACR), and severity (IGK). RESULTS: The patients (N = 190, 92.06% female, age (mean ± SD) 47.23 ± 13.43 years) were sorted according to health status in nine CRGs. We found that most SLE patients (> 70%) were in CRGs 5 and 6. The main HR-QoL issues in these patients were related to mobility, ability to perform usual activities, and pain/discomfort. The scores (mean ± SD) for EQ-5D-5L and VAS were 0.74 ± 0.25 and 65.67 ± 23.52, respectively. We found that the age of the patients negatively affected their HR-QoL (r = - 0.266). SLE direct costs per patient increased with each CRG group, representing 71.92% of the total costs, while indirect costs were highly variable. The average cost per patient with SLE amounted to €8432.85 (year 2014). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' quality of life is related with age, disease activity, damage, and severity. Age was the parameter which most affects HR-QoL. Most costs of SLE are concentrated in two CRGs in which the HR-QoL deteriorates sharply.

The trade-off between equity and efficiency in population health gain: Making it real.

Two fundamental goals of health systems are to maximise overall population health gain (referred to as efficiency) and to minimise unfair health inequalities (equity). Often there is a trade-off in maximising efficiency vis a vis equity and the relative weight given to one goal over the other is acknowledged to be essentially a value judgement. Health systems necessarily make those value judgements but in making them would benefit from relevant and accurate opportunity cost information. Unfortunately the development of practical tools to measure equity-efficiency trade-offs has lagged theoretical advances in this area. We address this gap by presenting a practical technique to reveal opportunity costs of equity (and efficiency) gains in decentralised population-based health systems, applying stochastic data envelopment analysis to ethnic-specific life expectancy (LE) changes for 20 New Zealand (NZ) District Health Boards for the inter-census period 2006-2013, thereby deriving a notional health frontier from 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Four different ways to increase health equity emerge. These show that a trade-off between equity and efficiency does not always exist. In particular, improving both productive efficiency and allocative efficiency (up to its maximum) can also yield gains in equity through reductions in LE inequalities. However, in NZ's case, the opportunity cost (in sacrificed European life-years) of achieving gains in equity beyond the point of maximum productive and allocative efficiency is relatively high, even for quite small reductions in the LE gap between Maori and European populations. This high opportunity cost may explain why, despite governments' strong rhetorical commitment to equity, NZ's health gains have not strayed far from the path of maximising allocative efficiency. Nevertheless, this opportunity cost could be reduced significantly by measures which shift the health frontier outward, highlighting the importance of technical and organisational innovation as potential drivers of greater equity in health outcomes.

Application of Lean Healthcare methodology in a urology department of a tertiary hospital as a tool for improving efficiency. / Aplicación de la metodología Lean healthcare en un servicio de urología de un hospital terciario como herramienta de mejora de la eficiencia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the application of the Lean methodology as a method for continuously improving the efficiency of a urology department in a tertiary hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The implementation of the Lean Healthcare methodology in a urology department was conducted in 3 phases: 1) team training and improvement of feedback among the practitioners, 2) management by process and superspecialisation and 3) improvement of indicators (continuous improvement). The indicators were obtained from the Hospital's information systems. The main source of information was the Balanced Scorecard for health systems management (CUIDISS). The comparison with other autonomous and national urology departments was performed through the same platform with the help of the Hospital's records department (IASIST). A baseline was established with the indicators obtained in 2011 for the comparative analysis of the results after implementing the Lean Healthcare methodology. RESULTS: The implementation of this methodology translated into high practitioner satisfaction, improved quality indicators reaching a risk-adjusted complication index (RACI) of 0.59 and a risk-adjusted mortality rate (RAMR) of 0.24 in 4 years. A value of 0.61 was reached with the efficiency indicator (risk-adjusted length of stay [RALOS] index), with a savings of 2869 stays compared with national Benchmarking (IASIST). The risk-adjusted readmissions index (RARI) was the only indicator above the standard, with a value of 1.36 but with progressive annual improvement of the same. CONCLUSIONS: The Lean methodology can be effectively applied to a urology department of a tertiary hospital to improve efficiency, obtaining significant and continuous improvements in all its indicators, as well as practitioner satisfaction. Team training, management by process, continuous improvement and delegation of responsibilities has been shown to be the fundamental pillars of this methodology.

Costs and hospital procedures in an urology department of a tertiary hospital. Analysis of groups related by their diagnosis. / Costes y procesos hospitalarios en un servicio de urología de un hospital terciario. Análisis de los grupos relacionados por el diagnóstico.

INTRODUCTION: The health care system has management tools available in hospitals that facilitate the assessment of efficiency through the study of costs and management control in order to make a better use of the resources. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was the calculation and analysis of the total cost of a urology department, including ambulatory, hospitalization and surgery activity and the drafting of an income statement where service costs are compared with income earned from the Government fees during 2014. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the information recorded by the Economic Information System of the Department of Health, ABC and top-down method of cost calculation was applied by process care activity. The cost results obtained were compared with the rates established for ambulatory and hospital production in the Tax Law of the Generalitat Valenciana. The production was structured into outpatient (external and technical consultations) and hospital stays and surgeries (inpatient). RESULTS: A total of 32,510 outpatient consultations, 7,527 techniques, 2,860 interventions and 4,855 hospital stays were made during 2014. The total cost was 7,579,327€; the cost for outpatient consultations was 1,748,145€, 1,229,836 Euros for technical consultations, 2,621,036€ for surgery procedures and 1,980,310€ for hospital admissions. Considered as income the current rates applied in 2014 (a total of 15,035,843€), the difference between income and expenditure was 7,456,516€. CONCLUSIONS: The economic balance was positive with savings over 50% and a mean adjusted hospitalization stay rate (IEMAC) rate of 0.67 (33% better than the standard). CMA had a favorable impact on cost control.