Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Surgical supplies occupy a large portion of health care expenditures but is often under the surgeon's control. We sought to assess whether an automated, surgeon-directed, cost feedback system can decrease supply expenditures for five common general surgery procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An automated "surgical receipt" detailing intraoperative supply costs was generated and emailed to surgeons after each case. We compared the median cost per case for 18 mo before and after implementation of the surgical receipt. We controlled for price fluctuations by applying common per-unit prices in both periods. We also compared the incision time, case length booking accuracy, length of stay, and postoperative occurrences. RESULTS: Median costs decreased significantly for open inguinal hernia ($433.45 to $385.49, P < 0.001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy ($886.77 to $816.13, P = 0.002), and thyroidectomy ($861.21 to $825.90, P = 0.034). Median costs were unchanged for laparoscopic appendectomy and increased significantly for lumpectomy ($325.67 to $420.53, P < 0.001). There was an increase in incision-to-closure minutes for open inguinal hernia (71 to 75 min, P < 0.001) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (75 to 96 min, P < 0.001), but a decrease in thyroidectomy (79 to 73 min, P < 0.001). There was an increase in booking accuracy for laparoscopic appendectomy (38.6% to 55.0%, P = 0.001) and thyroidectomy (32.5% to 48.1%, P = 0.001). There were no differences in postoperative occurrence rates and length of stay duration. CONCLUSIONS: An automated surgeon-directed surgical receipt may be a useful tool to decrease supply costs for certain procedures. However, curtailing surgical supply costs with surgeon-directed cost feedback alone is challenging and a multimodal approach may be necessary.

Grow the Pie: Interdepartmental Cooperation as a Method for Achieving Operational Efficiency in an Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Despite sufficient literature analyzing macroscopic and microscopic methods of addressing emergency department (ED) operations, there is a paucity of studies that analyze methods between these extremes. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a quasi-experimental study incorporating a pre/post-intervention comparison to determine whether interdepartmental cooperation is effective at improving ED operations by combining microscopic and macroscopic concepts. METHODS: We performed an analysis of operational and financial data from a cooperative investment in imaging transport personnel between the emergency and radiology departments. Our primary outcome, order to table time (OTT), measured imaging times by modality (computed tomography [CT], ultrasound [US], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). These were compared for statistically significant change before and after the intervention. Our secondary outcome, gross profit, was calculated using the revenue generated from gained outpatient studies minus the associated direct personnel costs. RESULTS: Transporters improved OTTs by decreasing median imaging times from 132 min to 116 min (p < 0.0005). Efficiency improved for CT scans with median time decreasing from 142 min to 114 min (p < 0.0005). Transport hires had adverse effects on US, with an increase in median OTT from 91 min to 99 min (p < 0.018). MRI experienced a similar trend in OTT, as median times worsened from 215 min to 235 min (p < 0.225). The investment in transporters generated a gross profit of $1.03 million for the radiology department over 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Interdepartmental cooperation is a broadly applicable macroscopic method that is effective at achieving microscopic, site-specific gains in ED efficiency. Transporters provided operational gains for the ED and financial gains for the radiology department.