Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Endourol ; 30(3): 254-6, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26542761

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The frequency of flexible ureteroscopy has increased with the introduction of improved instrumentation. Ureteroscopes allow increased endoscopic access to the ureter and kidney. However, maintenance and repair of scopes may increase the total procedure expense. METHODS: In 3 years (8/2011-7/2014), 655 flexible ureteroscopies were performed at a single-specialty, urology, ambulatory surgery center. Procedures were performed by 26 board-certified urologists using four Olympus URF P5 flexible ureteroscopes. The instruments were handled by a single team and sterilized through the STERIS System E1. Repairs were performed by the manufacturer on an as needed basis. Patient records were reviewed to determine the preoperative diagnosis, operative time, location and size of the stone, and use of laser or ureteral sheath. The occurrence, nature of flexible ureteroscope damage, and cost of repairs were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the ureteroscopies performed, 78% was for the treatment of calculi (50.1% in the kidney). Mean stone size was 8.5 ± 0.2 mm, with larger stones (11 mm) located in the kidney. The flexible ureteroscope was advanced over a guidewire (88% of cases); a laser fiber was introduced in 70%, and a ureteral sheath was used in 13.4%. Mean procedure time was 40 minutes. The most common reasons for ureteroscope repair were cloudy lens (16 repairs) and broken optic fibers (9 repairs). There were 31 repairs during the study period (average 21 cases per repair). Flexible ureteroscopes were out of service for an average of 11 days per repair (range 3-20). The total cost of repairs was $233,150 or ∼$7521 per repair. The average repair cost per flexible ureteroscopy performed was $355. CONCLUSIONS: Expenses associated with instrument repair can significantly impact a procedure's net revenue, thus efforts should be made to minimize instrument breakage. The expense of repairing a flexible ureteroscope per procedure can be significant and needs to be considered when pricing this procedure.


Assuntos
Tecnologia de Fibra Óptica/economia , Cálculos Renais/cirurgia , Cálculos Ureterais/cirurgia , Ureteroscópios/economia , Custos e Análise de Custo , Reutilização de Equipamento , Tecnologia de Fibra Óptica/instrumentação , Humanos , Manutenção/economia , Duração da Cirurgia , Esterilização , Ureteroscopia/economia , Ureteroscopia/instrumentação , Urologia
2.
J Endourol ; 24(9): 1483-6, 2010 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20653420

RESUMO

AIM: To analyze the impact of slowing the shockwave delivery during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) on the clinical patient outcome and the cost of delivering this service in a community practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data from 1745 consecutive SWL procedures were analyzed at a freestanding surgery center. About 872 treatments were performed at 120 shocks per minute (fast rate [FR]) and 873 were performed at 60 shocks per minute (slow rate [SR]) using a Lithotron machine. Ninety-nine percent of the patients received 3000 shocks. The location and stone size were similar in both groups. Stone-free rate was determined by a plain film of the abdomen at follow-up. RESULTS: The clinical outcome of SR shows a statistically significant improvement in stone-free rate on all stone locations and stone sizes except for those smaller than 25 mm(2). The need for additional secondary treatment decreased from 35.4% to 18.2%. The anesthesia time increased from 26 to 50 minutes per treatment. On the basis of Medicare reimbursement, there was an increase of $28,294 for anesthesia services by going SR. However, the savings realized as a result of decrease in secondary procedures was $264,989, resulting in a total savings of $236,695 during the study period. The cost savings was $271.13 per SWL treatment. CONCLUSION: The slowing of SWL treatment results in a longer procedure decreasing the time available for treatment; however, the clinical outcome results in improved patient quality of care and decreased cost. Slowing SWL both benefits the patient and decreases the cost of SWL in the community setting.


Assuntos
Litotripsia/economia , Litotripsia/métodos , Cálculos Urinários/economia , Cálculos Urinários/terapia , Humanos , Reembolso de Seguro de Saúde , Medicare , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA