Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 181
Filtrar
1.
Can J Surg ; 67(4): E295-E299, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39089817

RESUMEN

SummaryCentralized referral systems have been successfully implemented to shorten and equalize surgical wait times; however, ongoing expenses make sustaining these projects challenging. We trialed a low-cost centralized booking project for hernia surgery in a community hospital from July to November 2019. Eligible patients (i.e., those with visible or palpable inguinal or umbilical hernias who were agreeable to an open mesh repair) were booked with the first available surgeon after initial consultation. Centrally booked patients with either inguinal or umbilical hernias waited a mean of 82 (standard deviation [SD] 32) and 80 (SD 66) days, respectively, while those who did not use the centralized system waited 137 (SD 89) and 181 (SD 92) days, respectively. Centralized booking increased operating room utilization as a larger pool of patients was available to call when last-minute cancellation occurred; centralized booking also effectively equalized wait-lists among 6 surgeons. Selective centralized booking is a promising concept that led to more efficient utilization of available operating room time with a significant decrease in wait times; this system could potentially improve access for all patients awaiting general surgery without requiring additional funding.


Asunto(s)
Citas y Horarios , Hernia Inguinal , Herniorrafia , Derivación y Consulta , Listas de Espera , Humanos , Derivación y Consulta/organización & administración , Derivación y Consulta/economía , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Herniorrafia/economía , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Hernia Umbilical/cirugía , Hernia Umbilical/economía , Quirófanos/economía , Quirófanos/organización & administración , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad
2.
Chirurgia (Bucur) ; 119(2): 227-234, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38982889

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Inguinal hernia management in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and comorbidities presents challenges due to potential impacts on wound healing and infection risk. This study evaluates the influence of additional comorbidities on outcomes following open inguinal hernia repair in DM patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Craiova Emergency Clinical County Hospital from 2015 to 2020. Patients with documented DM undergoing hernia repair were categorized into two groups based on comorbidity status. Data on presentation mode, hernia type, comorbidities, hospitalization, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and costs were collected and analyzed statistically. RESULTS: Among 38 DM patients undergoing hernia repair, 16 were in Group A (DM alone) and 22 in Group B (DM with comorbidities). Group B patients were older (p = 0.0002) and more likely to present emergently (OR: 13.81, p=0.0148) with incarcerated (OR: 22.733, p=0.0339) or strangulated hernias (OR: 9.4545, p=0.0390). Group B had longer hospitalizations (p=0.00132) and higher hospitalization costs (p = 0.00262). CONCLUSIONS: DM patients with comorbidities are at higher risk for complex hernias and prolonged hospitalizations. Pulmonary fibrosis emerges as a significant comorbidity requiring specific perioperative strategies. Tailored preoperative assessments and care plans can optimize outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Comorbilidad , Diabetes Mellitus , Hernia Inguinal , Herniorrafia , Humanos , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Herniorrafia/economía , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Rumanía/epidemiología , Adulto
3.
Am J Surg ; 235: 115781, 2024 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38834418

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: While race and insurance have been linked with greater likelihood of hernia incarceration and emergent presentation, the association of broader social determinants of health (SDOH) with outcomes following urgent repair remains to be elucidated. STUDY DESIGN: All adult hospitalizations entailing emergent repair for strangulated inguinal, femoral, and ventral hernias were identified in the 2016-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Socioeconomic vulnerability was ascertained using relevant diagnosis codes. Multivariable models were developed to consider the independent associations between socioeconomic vulnerability and study outcomes. RESULTS: Of ∼236,215 patients, 20,306 (8.6 â€‹%) were Vulnerable. Following risk-adjustment, socioeconomic vulnerability remained associated with greater odds of in-hospital mortality, any perioperative complication, increased hospitalization expenditures and higher risk of non-elective readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing emergent hernia repair, socioeconomic vulnerability was linked with greater morbidity, expenditures, and readmission. As part of patient-centered care, novel screening, postoperative management, and SDOH-informed discharge planning programs are needed to mitigate disparities in outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Herniorrafia , Readmisión del Paciente , Humanos , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Factores Socioeconómicos , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Adulto , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Poblaciones Vulnerables/estadística & datos numéricos , Hernia Femoral/cirugía , Hernia Femoral/economía , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Inguinal/economía
4.
Langenbecks Arch Surg ; 409(1): 175, 2024 Jun 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38842610

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare the operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost associated with Robotic Surgery (RS) and Laparascopic Surgery (LS) in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies comparing short-term outcomes and cost between RS and LS in patients with anti-reflux and hiatal hernia were included. Data on operative time, complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost were extracted. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the MINORS scale. RESULTS: Fourteen retrospective observational studies involving a total of 555,368 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed no statistically significant difference in operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, and mortality between RS and LS. However, LS was associated with lower costs compared to RS. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that RS has non-inferior short-term outcomes in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery, compared to LS. LS is more cost-effective, but RS offers potential benefits such as improved visualization and enhanced surgical techniques. Further research, including randomized controlled trials and long-term outcome studies, is needed to validate and refine these findings.


Asunto(s)
Reflujo Gastroesofágico , Hernia Hiatal , Laparoscopía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Hernia Hiatal/cirugía , Hernia Hiatal/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Tempo Operativo , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Herniorrafia/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía
5.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 11523, 2024 05 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38769410

RESUMEN

Robotic-assisted treatment of ventral hernia offers many advantages, however, studies reported higher costs for robotic surgery compared to other surgical techniques. We aimed at comparing hospital costs in patients undergoing large ventral hernia repair with either robotic or open surgery. We searched from a prospectively maintained database patients who underwent robotic or open surgery for the treatment of the large ventral hernias from January 2016 to December 2022. The primary endpoint was to assess costs in both groups. For eligible patients, data was extracted and analyzed using a propensity score-matching. Sixty-seven patients were retrieved from our database. Thirty-four underwent robotic-assisted surgery and 33 open surgery. Mean age was 66.4 ± 4.1 years, 50% of patients were male. After a propensity score-matching, a similar total cost of EUR 18,297 ± 8,435 vs. 18,024 ± 7514 (p = 0.913) in robotic-assisted and open surgery groups was noted. Direct and indirect costs were similar in both groups. Robotic surgery showed higher operatory theatre-related costs (EUR 7532 ± 2,091 vs. 3351 ± 1872, p < 0.001), which were compensated by shorter hospital stay-related costs (EUR 4265 ± 4366 vs. 7373 ± 4698, p = 0.032). In the treatment of large ventral hernia, robotic surgery had higher operatory theatre-related costs, however, they were fully compensated by shorter hospital stays and resulting in similar total costs.


Asunto(s)
Hernia Ventral , Herniorrafia , Costos de Hospital , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Masculino , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Femenino , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Anciano , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Puntaje de Propensión
6.
J Robot Surg ; 18(1): 223, 2024 May 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38801638

RESUMEN

Over the past 2 decades, the use and importance of robotic surgery in minimally invasive surgery has increased. Across various surgical specialties, robotic technology has gained popularity through its use of 3D visualization, optimal ergonomic positioning, and precise instrument manipulation. This growing interest has also been seen in acute care surgery, where laparoscopic procedures are used more frequently. Despite the growing popularity of robotic surgery in the acute care surgical realm, there is very little research on the utility of robotics regarding its effects on health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. The current literature indicates some value in utilizing robotic technology in specific urgent procedures, such as cholecystectomies and incarcerated hernia repairs; however, the high cost of robotic surgery was found to be a potential barrier to its widespread use in acute care surgery. This narrative literature review aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in surgical procedures that are often done in urgent settings: cholecystectomies, inguinal hernia repair, ventral hernia repair, and appendectomies.


Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Herniorrafia , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Apendicectomía/economía , Apendicectomía/métodos , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Colecistectomía/economía , Colecistectomía/métodos , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Cirugía General/economía
7.
Surg Endosc ; 38(5): 2850-2856, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38568440

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and financial cost of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) versus retromuscular (RM) repairs in robotic incisional hernia repairs (rIHR). METHODS: Patients who underwent either IPOM or RM elective rIHR from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and hospital costs were directly compared. RESULTS: Sixty-nine IPOM and 55 RM were included. Age and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between both groups (IPOM vs RM: 59.3 ± 11.2 years vs. 57.5 ± 14 years, p = 0.423; BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 vs. BMI 33.2 ± 6.9, p = 0.435, respectively). Comorbidities and hernia characteristics were comparable. Extensive lysis of adhesions (> 30 min) was required more often in IPOM (18 vs. 6 in RM, p = 0.034). Defect closure was achieved in 100% of RM vs. 81.2% in IPOM (p < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) postoperative pain score was higher in RM than in IPOM [5(3-7) vs. 4(3-5), respectively, p = 0.006]. Median length of stay (0 day) and same-day discharge rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.598, p = 0.669, respectively). Six (8.7%) patients in the IPOM group versus one (1.8%) patient in the RM group were readmitted to hospital within 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.099). Perioperative complications were higher in IPOM (p = 0.011; 34.8% vs. 14.5% in RM) with higher Comprehensive Complication Index® morbidity scores [0(0-12.2) vs 0(0-0) in RM, p = 0.008)], Clavien-Dindo grade-II complications (8 vs 0 in RM, p = 0.009), and surgical site events (17 vs. 5 in RM, p = 0.024). Within a follow-up period of 57(± 28) months, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. Hospital costs did not differ between groups [IPOM: $9978 (7031-12,926) vs. RM: $8961(6701-11,222), p = 0.300]. Although postoperative complication costs were higher in IPOM ($2436 vs RM: $161, p = 0.020), total costs were comparable [IPOM: $12,415(8700-16,130) vs. RM: $9123(6789-11,457), p = 0.080]. CONCLUSION: Despite retromuscular repairs having lower postoperative complications than intraperitoneal onlay mesh repairs, both techniques offered encouraging results in robotic incisional hernia repair at a comparable total cost.


Asunto(s)
Herniorrafia , Hernia Incisional , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mallas Quirúrgicas/economía , Femenino , Masculino , Herniorrafia/métodos , Herniorrafia/economía , Hernia Incisional/cirugía , Hernia Incisional/economía , Anciano , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos
8.
Hernia ; 28(4): 1137-1144, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38683481

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The study objective is to document value created by real-world evidence from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) for regulatory decisions. The ACHQC is a national effort that generates data on hernia repair techniques and devices. METHODS: Two retrospective cohort evaluations compared cost and time of ACHQC analyses to traditional postmarket studies. The first analysis was based on 25 reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency of 20 mesh products for post-market surveillance. A second analysis supported label expansion submitted to the Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health for a robotic-assisted surgery device to include ventral hernia repair. Estimated costs of counterfactual studies, defined as studies that might have been done if the registry had not been available, were derived from a model described in the literature. Return on investment, percentage of cost savings, and time savings were calculated. RESULTS: 45,010 patients contributed to the two analyses. The cost and time differences between individual 25 ACHQC analyses (41,112 patients) and traditional studies ranged from $1.3 to $2.2 million and from 3 to 4.8 years, both favoring use of the ACHQC. In the second label expansion analysis (3,898 patients), the estimated return on investment ranged from 11 to 461% with time savings of 5.1 years favoring use of the ACHQC. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to traditional postmarket studies, use of ACHQC data can result in cost and time savings when used for appropriate regulatory decisions in light of key assumptions.


Asunto(s)
Herniorrafia , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Mallas Quirúrgicas/economía , Herniorrafia/economía , Vigilancia de Productos Comercializados , Estados Unidos , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía
9.
Hernia ; 28(4): 1205-1214, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38503978

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: There has been a rapid proliferation of the robotic approach to inguinal hernia, mainly in the United States, as it has shown similar outcomes to the laparoscopic approach but with a significant increase in associated costs. Our objective is to conduct a cost analysis in our setting (Spanish National Health System). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center comparative study on inguinal hernia repair using a robotic approach versus laparoscopic approach. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients who underwent either robotic or laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repair between October 2021 and July 2023 were analyzed. Out of these 98 patients, 20 (20.4%) were treated with the robotic approach, while 78 (79.6%) underwent the laparoscopic approach. When comparing both approaches, no significant differences were found in terms of complications, recurrences, or readmissions. However, the robotic group exhibited a longer surgical time (86 ± 33.07 min vs. 40 ± 14.46 min, p < 0.001), an extended hospital stays (1.6 ± 0.503 days vs. 1.13 ± 0.727 days, p < 0.007), as well as higher procedural costs (2318.63 ± 205.15 € vs. 356.81 ± 110.14 €, p < 0.001) and total hospitalization costs (3272.48 ± 408.49 € vs. 1048.61 ± 460.06 €, p < 0.001). These results were consistent when performing subgroup analysis for unilateral and bilateral hernias. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits observed in terms of recurrence rates and post-surgical complications do not justify the additional costs incurred by the robotic approach to inguinal hernia within the national public healthcare system. Nevertheless, it represents a simpler way to initiate the robotic learning curve, justifying its use in a training context.


Asunto(s)
Hernia Inguinal , Herniorrafia , Laparoscopía , Tempo Operativo , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Femenino , Anciano , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Adulto , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía
10.
Am Surg ; 90(6): 1140-1147, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38195166

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inability to achieve primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy is a frequently encountered problem by acute care and trauma surgeons. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of Wittmann patch-assisted closure to the planned ventral hernia closure. METHODS: A literature review was performed to determine the probabilities and outcomes for Wittmann patch-assisted primary closure and planned ventral hernia closure techniques. Average utility scores were obtained by a patient-administered survey for the following: rate of successful surgeries (uncomplicated abdominal wall closure), surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, abdominal hernia and enterocutaneous fistula. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was utilized to assess the survey responses and then converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Total cost for each strategy was calculated using Medicare billing codes. A decision tree was generated with rollback and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty. RESULTS: Wittmann patch-assisted closure was associated with higher clinical effectiveness of 19.43 QALYs compared to planned ventral hernia repair (19.38), with a relative cost reduction of US$7777. Rollback analysis supported Wittmann patch-assisted closure as the more cost-effective strategy. The resulting negative ICUR of -156,679.77 favored Wittmann patch-assisted closure. Monte Carlo analysis demonstrated a confidence of 96.8% that Wittmann patch-assisted closure was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates using the Wittmann patch-assisted closure strategy as a more cost-efficient management of the open abdomen compared to the planned ventral hernia approach.


Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Cierre de Herida Abdominal , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hernia Ventral , Herniorrafia , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Técnicas de Cierre de Herida Abdominal/economía , Mallas Quirúrgicas/economía , Análisis de Costo-Efectividad
11.
Am Surg ; 88(3): 463-470, 2022 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34816757

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive ventral hernia repair (MISVHR) has been performed for almost 30 years; recently, there has been an accelerated adoption of the robotic platform leading to renewed comparisons to open ventral hernia repair (OVHR). The present study evaluates patterns and outcomes of readmissions for MISVHR and OVHR patients. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was queried for patients undergoing OVHR and MISVHR from 2016 to 2018. Demographic characteristics, complications, and 90-day readmissions were determined. A subgroup analysis was performed to compare robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR) vs laparoscopic hernia repair (LVHR). Standard statistical methods and logistic regression were used. RESULTS: Over the 3-year period, there were 25 795 MISVHR and 180 635 OVHR admissions. Minimally invasive ventral hernia repair was associated with a lower rate of 90-day readmission (11.3% vs 17.3%, P < .01), length of stay (LOS) (4.0 vs 7.9 days, P < .01), and hospital charges ($68,240 ± 75 680 vs $87,701 ± 73 165, P < .01), which remained true when elective and non-elective repairs were evaluated independently. Postoperative infection was the most common reason for readmission but was less common in the MISVHR group (8.4% vs 16.8%, P < .01). Robotic ventral hernia repair increased over the 3-year period and was associated with decreased LOS (3.7 vs 4.1 days, P < .01) and comparable readmissions (11.3% vs 11.2%, P = .74) to LVHR, but was nearly $20,000 more expensive. In logistic regression, OVHR, non-elective operation, urban-teaching hospital, increased LOS, comorbidities, and payer type were predictive of readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Open ventral hernia repair was associated with increased LOS and increased readmissions compared to MISVHR. Robotic ventral hernia repair had comparable readmissions and decreased LOS to LVHR, but it was more expensive.


Asunto(s)
Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Laparoscopía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/estadística & datos numéricos , Precios de Hospital , Humanos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(11): e2130016, 2021 11 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34724554

RESUMEN

Importance: Preoperative optimization is an important clinical strategy for reducing morbidity; however, nearly 25% of persons undergoing elective abdominal hernia repairs are not optimized with respect to weight or substance use. Although the preoperative period represents a unique opportunity to motivate patient health behavior changes, fear of emergent presentation and financial concerns are often cited as clinician barriers to optimization. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of evidence-based patient optimization before surgery by implementing a low-cost preoperative optimization clinic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted 1 year after a preoperative optimization clinic was implemented for high-risk patients seeking elective hernia repair. The median (range) follow-up was 197 (39-378) days. A weekly preoperative optimization clinic was implemented in 2019 at a single academic center. Referral occurred for persons seeking elective hernia repair with a body mass index greater than or equal to 40, age 75 years or older, or active tobacco use. Data analysis was performed from February to July 2020. Exposures: Enrolled patients were provided health resources and longitudinal multidisciplinary care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were safety and eligibility for surgery after participating in the optimization clinic. The hypothesis was that the optimization clinic could preoperatively mitigate patient risk factors, without increasing patient risk. Safety was defined as the occurrence of complications during participation in the optimization clinic. The secondary outcome metric centered on the financial impact of implementing the preoperative optimization program. Results: Of the 165 patients enrolled in the optimization clinic, most were women (90 patients [54.5%]) and White (145 patients [87.9%]). The mean (SD) age was 59.4 (15.8) years. Patients' eligibility for the clinic was distributed across high-risk criteria: 37.0% (61 patients) for weight, 26.1% (43 patients) for tobacco use, and 23.6% (39 patients) for age. Overall, 9.1% of persons (15 patients) were successfully optimized for surgery, and tobacco cessation was achieved in 13.8% of smokers (8 patients). The rate of hernia incarceration requiring emergent surgery was 3.0% (5 patients). Economic evaluation found increased operative yield from surgical clinics, with a 58% increase in hernia-attributed relative value units without altering surgeon workflow. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, a hernia optimization clinic safely improved management of high-risk patients and increased operative yield for the institution. This represents an opportunity to create sustainable and scalable models that provide longitudinal care and optimize patients to improve outcomes of hernia repair.


Asunto(s)
Herniorrafia , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Índice de Masa Corporal , Árboles de Decisión , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Femenino , Hernia , Herniorrafia/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Michigan , Persona de Mediana Edad , Obesidad/complicaciones , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/economía , Medición de Riesgo/economía , Factores de Riesgo , Cese del Hábito de Fumar , Resultado del Tratamiento
13.
Ann Surg ; 274(4): 572-580, 2021 10 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34506312

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Value is defined as health outcomes important to patients relative to cost of achieving those outcomes: Value = Quality/Cost. For inguinal hernia repair, Level 1 evidence shows no differences in long-term functional status or recurrence rates when comparing surgical approaches. Differences in value reside within differences in cost. The aim of this study is to compare the value of different surgical approaches to inguinal hernia repair: Open (Open-IH), Laparoscopic (Lap-IH), and Robotic (R-TAPP). METHODS: Variable and fixed hospital costs were compared among consecutive Open-IH, Lap-IH, and R-TAPP repairs (100 each) performed in a university hospital. Variable costs (VC) including direct materials, labor, and variable overhead ($/min operating room [OR] time) were evaluated using Value Driven Outcomes, an internal activity-based costing methodology. Variable and fixed costs were allocated using full absorption costing to evaluate the impact of surgical approach on value. As cost data is proprietary, differences in cost were normalized to Open-IH cost. RESULTS: Compared to Open-IH, VC for Lap-IH were 1.02X higher (including a 0.81X reduction in cost for operating room [OR] time). For R-TAPP, VC were 2.11X higher (including 1.36X increased costs for OR time). With allocation of fixed cost, a Lap-IH was 1.03X more costly, whereas R-TAPP was 3.18X more costly than Open-IH. Using equivalent recurrence as the quality metric in the value equation, Lap-IH decreases value by 3% and R-TAPP by 69% compared to Open-IH. CONCLUSIONS: Use of higher cost technology to repair inguinal hernias reduces value. Incremental health benefits must be realized to justify increased costs. We expect payors and patients will incorporate value into payment decisions.


Asunto(s)
Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/economía , Costos de Hospital , Laparoscopía/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Humanos , Recuperación de la Función , Recurrencia , Mallas Quirúrgicas/economía , Resultado del Tratamiento
14.
J Surg Res ; 264: 408-417, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33848840

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repair is the most commonly performed elective operation in the United States, with over 800,000 cases annually. While clinical outcomes comparing laparoscopic versus open techniques have been well documented, there is little data comparing costs associated with these techniques. This study evaluates the cost of healthcare resources during the 90-d postoperative period following inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. Adult patients with an ICD-9 or CPT code for inguinal hernia repair from 2012 to 2014 were included. Patients with continuous enrollment for 6 mo prior to surgery and 6 mo after surgery were analyzed. Related healthcare service costs (readmission and/or ER visit and/or outpatient visit) were calculated by clinical classification software and generalized linear modeling was used to compare healthcare utilization between groups. RESULTS: 124,582 cases were identified (open = 84,535; lap = 40,047). Index surgery cost was 41% higher in laparoscopic cases. The cost for readmission was close to $25,000 and similar between both groups, but the laparoscopic group were 12% less likely to be readmitted for surgical complications within 90-d when compared to the open group. Cost of bilateral laparoscopic repair is less than that of serial unilateral open repairs. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair carries a higher index surgery cost than open repair. However, open repair has an increased rate of readmission. To maximize value, efforts should be directed at minimizing readmissions and improving identification of bilateral hernias at the time of initial presentation.


Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/estadística & datos numéricos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Adulto , Anciano , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/estadística & datos numéricos , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Herniorrafia/efectos adversos , Herniorrafia/economía , Humanos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Periodo Posoperatorio , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
16.
BJS Open ; 5(1)2021 01 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33609369

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There has been a rapid adoption of robot-assisted laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in the USA, despite a lack of proven clinical advantage and higher material cost. No studies have been published regarding the cost and outcome of robotic inguinal hernia surgery in a European Union setting. METHODS: A retrospective comparative study was performed on the early outcome and costs related to laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, with either conventional or robot-assisted surgery. RESULTS: The study analysed 676 patients undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (272 conventional and 404 robotic repairs). Conventional laparoscopic and robotic repair groups were comparable in terms of duration of surgery (57.6 versus 56.2 min respectively; P = 0.224), intraoperative complication rate (1.1 versus 1.2 per cent; P = 0.990), in-hospital complication rate (4.4 versus 4.5 per cent; P = 0.230) and readmission rate (3.3 versus 1.2 per cent; P = 0.095). There was a significant difference in hospital stay in favour of the robotic approach (P = 0.014), with more patients treated on an outpatient basis in the robotic group (59.2 per cent versus 70.0 per cent for conventional repair). At 4-week follow-up, equal numbers of seromas or haematomas were recorded in the conventional laparoscopic and robotic groups (13.3 versus 15.7 per cent respectively; P = 0.431), but significantly more umbilical wound infections were seen in the conventional group (3.0 per cent versus 0 per cent in the robotic group; P = 0.001). Robotic inguinal hernia repair was significantly more expensive overall, with a mean cost of €2612 versus €1963 for the conventional laparoscopic approach (mean difference €649; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair was significantly more expensive than conventional laparoscopy. More patients were treated as outpatients in the robotic group. Postoperative complications were infrequent and mild.


Asunto(s)
Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/instrumentación , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Herniorrafia/economía , Humanos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Análisis Multivariante , Tempo Operativo , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Estudios Retrospectivos
17.
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A ; 31(1): 124-129, 2021 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32990497

RESUMEN

Background: Single-port, laparoscopic, needle-assisted, inguinal hernia repair (LNAR) in children intends to reduce surgical trauma and enables contralateral assessment and closure of contralateral patent processus vaginalis if necessary. The aim of the present study was to demonstrate that laparoscopic inguinal repair can be performed safely and cost-effectively in a developing country where laparoscopy is not yet commonly used. Methods: In this single-center study, we included all children undergoing LNAR between January 2017 and December 2018. Intraoperative and postoperative complications and hospital costs were assessed. Results: We performed 148 hernia repair operations in 117 children (age range 1 month to 15 years). Mean operative time was 20.8 ± 9.4 minutes. Mean length of hospital stay amounted to 10 ± 7.6 hours, with 77.7% of patients discharged within 6 hours. No intraoperative complications occurred in any patient. Complications occurred in six (5.1%) patients. Three (2.5%) patients experienced residual hydrocele, two (1.4%) patients suffered wound site seroma, and one (0.67%) patient experienced recurrent inguinal hernia 6 months after the initial repair. All complications occurred during the first year of the study period. Likewise, operative time (P < .0001) as well as duration of hospital stay (P < .0001) was significantly shorter in the second year. Total costs for complete treatment were below USD 80 per patient, which is comparable with the costs associated with open herniotomy at the same institution. Conclusion: Single-port LNAR and hydrocele repair in children were established safely and cost-effectively in a developing country. Nevertheless, the procedure was associated with a steep learning curve.


Asunto(s)
Países en Desarrollo , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Adolescente , Niño , Preescolar , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Herniorrafia/economía , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Complicaciones Intraoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Intraoperatorias/epidemiología , Laparoscopía/economía , Curva de Aprendizaje , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Nepal , Tempo Operativo , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos
18.
J Surg Res ; 258: 64-72, 2021 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33002663

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repair is the most common general surgery operation in the United States. Nearly 80% of inguinal hernia operations are performed under general anesthesia versus 15%-20% using local anesthesia, despite the absence of evidence for the superiority of the former. Although patients aged 65 y and older are expected to benefit from avoiding general anesthesia, this presumed benefit has not been adequately studied. We hypothesized that the benefits of local over general anesthesia for inguinal hernia repair would increase with age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 87,794 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project who had elective inguinal hernia repair under local or general anesthesia from 2014 to 2018, and we used propensity scores to adjust for known confounding. We compared postoperative complications, 30-day readmissions, and operative time for patients aged <55 y, 55-64 y, 65-74 y, and ≥75 y. RESULTS: Using local rather than general anesthesia was associated with a 0.6% reduction in postoperative complications in patients aged 75+ y (95% CI -0.11 to -1.13) but not in younger patients. Local anesthesia was associated with faster operative time (2.5 min - 4.7 min) in patients <75 y but not in patients aged 75+ y. Readmissions did not differ by anesthesia modality in any age group. Projected national cost savings for greater use of local anesthesia ranged from $9 million to $45 million annually. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons should strongly consider using local anesthesia for inguinal hernia repair in older patients and in younger patients because it is associated with significantly reduced complications and substantial cost savings.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia General/estadística & datos numéricos , Anestesia Local/estadística & datos numéricos , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Anciano , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Femenino , Herniorrafia/efectos adversos , Herniorrafia/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tempo Operativo , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
19.
J Robot Surg ; 15(1): 45-52, 2021 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32277399

RESUMEN

Pressure on health care providers is growing due to capping of remuneration for medical services in most Western European countries. We wanted to investigate, if robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair is reasonable from an economic point of view in our setting. Patients undergoing open or robotic-assisted repair for complex abdominal wall hernia using a Transversus Abdominis Release (TAR) between September 2017 and January 2019 were included. Procedure-related costs were calculated exact to the minute and cost unit accounting for the postoperative in-patient stay was done. Abdominal wall reconstruction using the TAR-technique was done in a total of 26 (10 female) patients via an open (n = 10) or robotic-assisted (n = 16) approach. No significant difference was seen in regard to age, BMI and ASA scores between subgroups. Time for operation was longer (253.5 vs 211.5 min; p = 0.0322), while postoperative hospital stay was shorter for patients operated with a robotic-assisted approach (4.5 vs 12.5 days; p < 0.005). Procedure-related costs were 2.7-fold higher when a robotic-assisted reconstruction was done (EUR 5397 vs. 1989), while total costs for in-patient stay were about 60% lower (EUR 2715 vs 6663). Currently, revenues by national insurance account for a total of EUR 9577 leading to a profit of EUR 1465 and 925 for the robotic-assisted and open myofascial release, respectively. In addition, 30-day re-admission rate was in favor of the robotic-assisted approach as well (6.3% vs 20%). From an economic point of view, robotic-assisted TAR for complex ventral hernia repair is a viable option in our setting. Higher procedure-related costs are offset by a significant shorter hospital stay. The economic advantage goes along with improvement in outcome of patients.


Asunto(s)
Ahorro de Costo/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hernia Ventral/economía , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/economía , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Músculos Abdominales/cirugía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tempo Operativo , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento
20.
Ann Surg ; 274(1): 107-113, 2021 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31460881

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to understand variation in intraoperative and postoperative utilization for common general surgery procedures. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Reducing surgical costs is paramount to the viability of hospitals. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of electronic health record data for 7762 operations from 2 health systems. Adult patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and inguinal/femoral hernia repair between November 1, 2013 and November 30, 2017 were reviewed for 3 utilization measures: intraoperative disposable supply costs, procedure time, and postoperative length of stay (LOS). Crossed hierarchical regression models were fit to understand case-mixed adjusted variation in utilization across surgeons and locations and to rank surgeons. RESULTS: The number of surgeons performing each type of operation ranged from 20 to 63. The variation explained by surgeons ranged from 8.9% to 38.2% for supply costs, from 15.1% to 54.6% for procedure time, and from 1.3% to 7.0% for postoperative LOS. The variation explained by location ranged from 12.1% to 26.3% for supply costs, from 0.2% to 2.5% for procedure time, and from 0.0% to 31.8% for postoperative LOS. There was a positive correlation (ρ = 0.49, P = 0.03) between surgeons' higher supply costs and longer procedure times for hernia repair, but there was no correlation between other utilization measures for hernia repair and no correlation between any of the utilization measures for laparoscopic appendectomy or cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons are significant drivers of variation in surgical supply costs and procedure time, but much less so for postoperative LOS. Intraoperative and postoperative utilization profiles can be generated for individual surgeons and may be an important tool for reducing surgical costs.


Asunto(s)
Costos de Hospital , Cuidados Intraoperatorios/economía , Cuidados Posoperatorios/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/economía , Adulto , Anciano , Apendicectomía/economía , California , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica/economía , Control de Costos , Equipos y Suministros de Hospitales/economía , Femenino , Herniorrafia/economía , Humanos , Laparoscopía/economía , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tempo Operativo , Estudios Retrospectivos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...