Real-world costs of transvenous lead extraction: the challenge for reimbursement.

AIMS: Transvenous lead extraction is challenging, often requiring specialist equipment and prolonged hospital admission. A single tariff or itemized costs may be available for reimbursement. Due to limited data relating to the costs of transvenous extraction, it is unclear whether either form of reimbursement is adequate. We aim to describe accurately the total real-world costs of managing patients undergoing transvenous extraction at a single, large centre. We further aim to consider the additional costs of device reimplantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: At a single UK extraction centre, a retrospective, patient level service line analysis was undertaken, during a complete financial year. Seventy-four patients required transvenous extraction (47 infected and 27 non-infected; 156 leads). Sixty-nine procedures (93%) were performed under general anaesthesia, with a median time in theatre of 95 min [interquartile range (IQR) 71-120]. Specialist extraction tools were required for 130 leads (83%). The median hospitalization duration was 3 days (IQR 1-8). The mean cost of extraction was £9228 (±4099); infected £10 727 (±4178) and non-infected £6619 (±2269). With the additional costs of device reimplantation, the overall mean cost rose to £17 574 (±12 882); infected £22 615 (±13 343) and non-infected £8801 (±5007). At the time of this study, the UK NHS tariff was £2530 for elective and £4764 for non-elective extraction, covering barely half of the real costs. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a substantial difference between the real-world cost of extraction and the UK NHS tariff. Extracting centres should scrutinize their practice, including the timing of reimplantation.

The (cost) effectiveness of procedural sedation and analgesia versus general anaesthesia for hysteroscopic myomectomy, a multicentre randomised controlled trial: PROSECCO trial, a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: In women with abnormal uterine bleeding, fibroids are a frequent finding. In case of heavy menstrual bleeding and presence of submucosal type 0-1 fibroids, hysteroscopic resection is the treatment of first choice, as removal of these fibroids is highly effective. Hysteroscopic myomectomy is currently usually performed in the operating theatre. A considerable reduction in costs and a higher patient satisfaction are expected when procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol (PSA) in an outpatient setting is applied. However, both safety and effectiveness - including the necessity for re-intervention due to incomplete resection - have not yet been evaluated. METHODS: This study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial with a non-inferiority design and will be performed in the Netherlands. Women > 18 years with a maximum of 3 symptomatic type 0 or 1 submucosal fibroids with a maximum diameter of 3.5 cm are eligible to participate in the trial. After informed consent, 205 women will be randomised to either hysteroscopic myomectomy using procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol in an outpatient setting or hysteroscopic myomectomy using general anaesthesia in a clinical setting in the operating theatre. Primary outcome will be the percentage of complete resections, based on transvaginal ultrasonography 6 weeks postoperatively. Secondary outcomes are cost effectiveness, menstrual blood loss (Pictorial blood assessment chart), quality of life, pain, return to daily activities/work, hospitalization, (post) operative complications and re-interventions. Women will be followed up to one year after hysteroscopic myomectomy. DISCUSSION: This study may demonstrate comparable effectiveness of hysteroscopic myomectomy under procedural sedation and analgesia versus general anaesthesia in a safe and patient friendly environment, whilst achieving a significant cost reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register, number NTR5357 . Registered 11th of August 2015.

What Are the Primary Cost Drivers of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the United States? A Cost-Minimization Analysis of 14,713 Patients.

PURPOSE: To analyze the individual costs associated with anterior crucial ligament reconstruction (ACLR), accounting for patient demographics, perioperative decision making, and location of the surgical procedure (hospital vs ambulatory surgery center), utilizing a cost-minimization analysis in a large national database. METHODS: Univariate analysis and multiple linear regression were performed to determine which patient and surgical variables were the largest cost drivers for ACLR in the United States according to the State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database. RESULTS: The average cost for ACLR (n = 14,713) was $24,707 (standard deviation, $15,644). When patient variables were considered, younger age (P < .001), male sex (P < .001), Hispanic ethnicity (P < .001), number of chronic medical conditions (P < .001), Medicare insurance (P < .001), and quartile of household income (P < .001) were all associated with higher costs after ACLR. For operative variables, time spent in the operating room (P < .001), meniscal repair (P < .001), and use of general anesthesia alone (P < .001) were all associated with higher costs for ACLR. There was no significant difference between cost of surgery performed at a private surgery center and cost at a hospital-owned center. In the multivariate regression, the 3 variables with the greatest influence on cost of ACLR were use of isolated general anesthesia (associated with an increase of $2,049), Hispanic ethnicity ($1,828), and >1 chronic medical condition ($1,749). Male sex, time in operating room, and older age also significantly increased ACLR cost. CONCLUSIONS: The greatest contributor to cost of ACLR was the use of general anesthesia alone. Time spent in the operating room increased ACLR cost by $108 per minute. Patient factors included greater age, male sex, Hispanic ethnicity, number of chronic medical conditions, Medicare insurance, and annual income. Meniscal repair and regional nerve block did not significantly affect cost as determined by multivariate regression.

Office-based vs. operating room-performed laryngopharyngeal surgery: a review of cost differences.

PURPOSE: Office-based transnasal flexible endoscopic surgery under topical anesthesia has recently been developed as an alternative for transoral laryngopharyngeal surgery under general anesthesia. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in health care costs between the two surgical settings. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting on costs of laryngopharyngeal procedures that could either be performed in the office or operating room (i.e., laser surgery, biopsies, vocal fold injection, or hypopharyngeal or esophageal dilation). Quality assessment of the included references was performed. RESULTS: Of 2953 identified studies, 13 were included. Quality assessment revealed that methodology differed significantly among the included studies. All studies reported lower costs for procedures performed in the office compared to those performed in the operating room. The variation within reported hospital and physician charges was substantial. CONCLUSION: Office-based laryngopharyngeal procedures under topical anesthesia result in lower costs compared to similar procedures performed under general anesthesia.

[Regional anesthesia in daily clinical practice: an economic analysis based on case vignettes]. / Regionalanästhesie im klinischen Alltag: eine ökonomische Analyse anhand eines Versorgungsbeispiels.

BACKGROUND: The economic effect is a crucial aspect of every medical procedure. This article analyzes the economic implications of various methods in anesthesia based on three case vignettes. METHODS: The management of anesthesia of a forearm fracture with sufficient brachial plexus blockade, general anesthesia and insufficient brachial plexus blockade with subsequent general anesthesia was analyzed with respect to the relevant cost factors (personnel costs, durables, consumables, fixed assets costs, anesthesia-related overhead costs). RESULTS: Sufficient regional anesthesia was the least expensive method for a forearm fracture with 324.26 €, followed by general anesthesia with 399.18 € (+23% compared with regional anesthesia). Insufficient regional anesthesia was most the expensive method, which necessitated an additional general anesthesia (482.55 €, +49% compared with sufficient regional anesthesia). CONCLUSION: Even considering that this cost analysis was calculated based on data from only one medical institution (General Hospital of Vienna, Medical University of Vienna), regional anesthesia appeared to be cost efficient compared with other anesthesia procedures. Main cost drivers in this example were personnel costs.

Assessing the outcomes, risks, and costs of local versus general anesthesia: A review with implications for cutaneous surgery.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data providing direct comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs between general and local anesthesia in cutaneous surgery. OBJECTIVE: Analyze the literature from dermatologic and other specialties to compare outcomes, risks, and costs of general and local anesthesia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of case comparison studies from other specialties comparing outcomes, risks, and/or costs in local versus general anesthesia was performed. A review of the literature from dermatology and other specialties was included. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies were selected; 41 of them directly examined outcomes in procedures performed under local and general anesthesia, and none found a significant difference in outcomes. A total of 41 studies measured adverse effects. Of these, 15 studies (36.6%) report significantly better outcomes between the 2 techniques. Only 2 studies (4.9%) report significantly improved outcomes with use of general anesthesia; 15 of 36 studies (41.7%) report fewer adverse events in local anesthesia. Of the 13 studies that examined costs, all (100%) found significantly decreased costs with use of local anesthesia. LIMITATIONS: These data cannot be seamlessly applied to all cases of cutaneous surgery. CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia techniques provide outcomes equal to or better than general anesthesia and with significantly lower costs.

Perioperative Management in Hepatic Resections: Comparative Effectiveness of Neuraxial Anesthesia and Disparity of Care Patterns.

BACKGROUND: Complication rates after hepatic resection can be affected by management decisions of the hospital care team and/or disparities in care. This is true in many other surgical populations, but little study has been done regarding patients undergoing hepatectomy. METHODS: Data from the claims-based national Premier Perspective database were used for 2006 to 2014. The analytical sample consisted of adults undergoing partial hepatectomy and total hepatic lobectomy with anesthesia care consisting of general anesthesia (GA) only or neuraxial and GA (n = 9442). The key independent variable was type of anesthesia that was categorized as GA versus GA + neuraxial. The outcomes examined were clinical complications and health care resource utilization. Unadjusted bivariate and adjusted multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the effects of the different types of anesthesia on clinical complications and health care resource utilization after controlling for patient- and hospital-level characteristics. RESULTS: Approximately 9% of patients were provided with GA + neuraxial anesthesia during hepatic resection. In multivariate analyses, no association was observed between types of anesthesia and clinical complications and/or health care utilization (eg, admission to intensive care unit). However, patients who received blood transfusions were significantly more likely to have complications and intensive care unit stays. In addition, certain disparities of care, including having surgery in a rural hospital, were associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Neuraxial anesthesia utilization was not associated with improvement in clinical outcome or cost among patients undergoing hepatic resections when compared to patients receiving GA alone. Future research may focus on prospective data sources with more clinical information on such patients and examine the effects of GA + neuraxial anesthesia on various complications and health care resource utilization.

Cost Implications of Varying the Surgical Technique, Surgical Setting, and Anesthesia Type for Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery.

PURPOSE: Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is a common surgical procedure, representing a financial burden to the health care system. The purpose of this study was to test whether the choice of CTR technique (open carpal tunnel release [OCTR] vs endoscopic carpal tunnel release [ECTR]), surgical setting (operating room vs procedure room [PR]), and anesthetic type (local, monitored anesthesia care [MAC], Bier block, general) affected costs or payments. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients undergoing isolated unilateral CTR between July 2014, and October 2017, at a single academic medical center were identified. Patients undergoing ECTR converted to OCTR, revision surgery, or additional procedures were excluded. Using our institution's information technology value tools, we calculated total direct costs (TDCs), total combined payment (TCP), hospital payment, surgeon payment, and anesthesia payment for each surgical encounter. Cost data were normalized using each participant's surgical encounter cost divided by the average cost in the data set and compared across 8 groups (defined by surgery type, operation location, and anesthesia type). RESULTS: Of 479 included patients, the mean age was 55.3 ± 16.1 years, and 68% were female. Payer mix included commercial (45%), Medicare (37%), Medicaid (13%), workers' compensation (2%), self-pay (1%), and other (3%) insurance types. The TDC and TCP both differed significantly between each CTR group, and OCTR in the PR under local anesthesia was the lowest. The OCTR/local/operating room, OCTR/MAC/operating room, and ECTR/operating room, were associated with 6.3-fold, 11.0-fold, and 12.4-16.6-fold greater TDC than OCTR/local/PR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Performing OCTR under local anesthetic in the PR setting significantly minimizes direct surgical encounter costs relative to other surgical methods (ECTR), anesthetic methods (Bier block, MAC, general), and surgical settings (operating room). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study identifies modifiable factors that may lead to cost reductions for CTR surgery.

Anesthetist-Directed Sedation Favors Success of Advanced Endoscopic Procedures.

OBJECTIVES: Sedation is required to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) given the duration and complexity of these advanced procedures. Sedation options include anesthetist-directed sedation (ADS) vs. gastroenterologist-directed sedation (GDS). Although ADS has been shown to shorten induction and recovery times, it is not established whether it impacts likelihood of procedure completion. Our aim was to assess whether ADS impacts the success of advanced endoscopy procedures. METHODS: We prospectively assessed the sedation strategy for patients undergoing ERCP and EUS between October 2010 and October 2013. Although assignment to ADS vs. GDS was not randomized, it was determined by day of the week. A sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching was used to model a randomized trial. The main outcome, procedure failure, was defined as an inability to satisfactorily complete the ERCP or EUS such that an additional endoscopic, radiographic, or surgical procedure was required. Failure was further categorized as failure due to inadequate sedation vs. technical problems. RESULTS: During the 3-year study period, 60% of the 1,171 procedures were carried out with GDS and 40% were carried out with ADS. Failed procedures occurred in 13.0% of GDS cases compared with 8.9% of ADS procedures (multivariate odds ratio (OR): 2.4 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5-3.6)).This was driven by a higher rate of sedation failures in the GDS group, 7.0%, than in the ADS group, 1.3% (multivariate OR: 7.8 (95% CI: 3.3-18.8)). There was no difference in technical success between the GDS and ADS groups (multivariate OR: 1.2 (95% CI: 0.7-1.9)). We were able to match 417 GDS cases to 417 ADS cases based on procedure type, indication, and propensity score. Analysis of the propensity score-matched patients confirmed our findings of increased sedation failure (multivariate OR: 8.9 (95% CI: 2.5-32.1)) but not technical failure (multivariate OR: 1.2 (0.7-2.2)) in GDS compared with ADS procedures. Adverse events of sedation were rare in both groups. Failed ERCP in the GDS group resulted in a total of 93 additional days of hospitalization. We estimate that $67,891 would have been saved if ADS had been used for all ERCP procedures. No statistically significant difference in EUS success was identified, although this sub-analysis was limited by sample size. CONCLUSION: ADS improves the success of advanced endoscopic procedures. Its routine use may increase the quality and efficiency of these services.

A Cost Analysis of Regional Versus General Anesthesia for Carotid Endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Medical care in the United States has evolved into a more cost-conscious value-based health care system that necessitates a comparison of costs when there are alternative interventions considered to be acceptable in the treatment of a disease. This study compares the cost differences between regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA) for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). METHODS: Data from 346 consecutive patients who underwent CEA between January 2012 and September 2014 were retrospectively reviewed for the type of anesthesia used, outcomes data, and cost variables. Overall hospital day costs were compared between RA and GA. Medians and interquartile ranges were compared using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant using 2-sided tests. RESULTS: Median overall costs for GA were significantly higher than median costs for RA (medians [with interquartile ranges], $10,140 [$7,158-$12,658] versus $7,122 [$5,072-$8,511], P < 0.001). Median total operative time for GA was significantly longer than median time for RA (168 [144-188] versus 134 [115-147] min, P < 0.001). Median in-hospital length of stay (LOS) for GA was significantly longer compared with RA (2.0 vs 1.2 days, P < 0.001). Patients who received GA were also more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased cost, operating room expenses, postoperative resources, and overall LOS were observed for individuals who underwent RA for CEA as compared with GA. In summary, RA is more cost-effective and should be the optimal choice when clinically appropriate.

Retrospective study of intra-anesthetic predictors of prolonged hospitalization, increased cost of care and mortality for canine patients at a veterinary teaching hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of intraoperative anesthetic variables on the length of hospitalization, cost of care and mortality in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. ANIMALS: A total of 235 dogs undergoing general anesthesia. METHODS: Medical records of dogs undergoing general anesthesia between 2007 and 2014 at the University of Georgia Veterinary Teaching Hospital were reviewed. Data collected included demographic data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, type and duration of anesthesia, hemodynamic variables, temperature, ventilation, fluid therapy and adjunctive drugs administered. Outcome variables were length of hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital charges and survival to discharge. RESULTS: The only factor significantly associated with duration of ICU care was higher ASA status (p<0.0001). Factors associated with increased cost of hospitalization were ICU duration (p<0.0001), anesthesia duration (p<0.0001), hemorrhage amount (p<0.0001), colloid use (p=0.0081), increased age (p=0.0253), increased weight (p = 0.0293) and presence of hypertension (p=0.0179). Overall mortality rate was 5.1%. The only factors negatively associated with survival were the administration of colloids (p<0.0008) and ASA status (p=0.0314). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Several intrinsic patient factors and intraoperative hemodynamic variables were significantly associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality in dogs. These factors might have prognostic value in conjunction with preoperative risk assessment, and patient outcome may be improved by stricter intraoperative control of these variables.

A retrospective investigation of the oral health records of a cohort of preschool children who received extractions under general anaesthesia including cost analysis of treatment.

Internationally, a considerable proportion of children aged five years and younger require extraction of teeth due to dental caries and frequently dental general anaesthesia (DGA) is the treatment of choice. AIMS: To investigate the records of a cohort of preschool children (aged five years and younger) referred to the public dental service provided at Cork University Hospital (CUH), Cork, Ireland, for extractions under DGA between the years 2000 and 2002. To determine the characteristics of the sample: disadvantage; the presence of a significant medical history; and, fluoride status. To establish the pattern of appointments and care, before, during and after DGA, and the pattern of dental treatment required up to sixth class (aged 11 to 12 years). METHODS: A retrospective review of dental records of a cohort of preschool-aged children referred for DGA in CUH during the years 2000-2002 was completed. Demographic and clinical data were collated and analysed using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS). Costs were provided by CUH and the Health Service Executive (HSE). Data on costs relating to preventive programmes were obtained from information presented in the Irish Oral Health Services Guideline Initiative 2009. RESULTS: A total of 347 children were included with a median age of.fQur years and a range of one to five years. Children with a disadvantage were more likely to require extractions under DGA than their- counterparts (50%, n=175). In total, 73% (n=253)~ of patients had a fluoridated water supply and 91% (n=316) had no adverse medical history. For 88% (n=306), their first dental visit was an emergency appointment. The primary indication for DGA was treatment of dental caries. A recall appointment was provided for 18% (n=63). One-quarter (n=86) required an extraction, antibiotic or referral for a second DGA at their first visit following DGA. In first class, referral for a second DGA or extraction under local anaesthetic (LA) was required for 23% (n=79) of patients. Over 60% (n=21 1) required either an extraction or a restoration in third class. In excess of 20% (n=69) of patients did not attend the sixth class dental inspection, the final assessment appointment in the public services. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of preschool children require extractions under DGA due to dental caries. The results of this study indicate that such children progress to adolescence with poor oral health, as evidenced by the need for further restorations, extractions and repeat DGA. The average cost of DGA was E819 per child. This figure has been shown to be as much as eight times the cost of a preventive/oral health promotion prograrnme operating within a similar cohort. An integrated preventive programme targeting preschool-aged children should be considered in attempting to manage the hicih levels of dental caries within this age group.

Economic and Environmental Considerations During Low Fresh Gas Flow Volatile Agent Administration After Change to a Nonreactive Carbon Dioxide Absorbent.

BACKGROUND: Reducing fresh gas flow (FGF) during general anesthesia reduces costs by decreasing the consumption of volatile anesthetics and attenuates their contribution to greenhouse gas pollution of the environment. The sevoflurane FGF recommendations in the Food and Drug Administration package insert relate to concern over potential toxicity from accumulation in the breathing circuit of compound A, a by-product of the reaction of the volatile agent with legacy carbon dioxide absorbents containing strong alkali such as sodium or potassium hydroxide. Newer, nonreactive absorbents do not produce compound A, making such restrictions moot. We evaluated 4 hypotheses for sevoflurane comparing intervals before and after converting from a legacy absorbent (soda lime) to a nonreactive absorbent (Litholyme): (1) intraoperative FGF would be reduced; (2) sevoflurane consumption per minute of volatile agent administration would be reduced; (3) cost savings due to reduced sevoflurane consumption would (modestly) exceed the incremental cost of the premium absorbent; and (4) residual wastage in discarded sevoflurane bottles would be <1%. METHODS: Inspired carbon dioxide (PICO2), expired carbon dioxide, oxygen, air, and nitrous oxide FGF, inspired volatile agent concentrations (FiAgent), and liquid volatile agent consumption were extracted from our anesthesia information management system for 8 4 week intervals before and after the absorbent conversion. Anesthesia providers were notified by e-mail and announcements at Grand Rounds about the impending change and were encouraged to reduce their average intraoperative sevoflurane FGF to 1.25 L/min. Personalized e-mail reports were sent every 4 weeks throughout the study period regarding the average intraoperative FGF (i.e., from surgery begin to surgery end) for each agent. Batch means methods were used to compare FGF, volatile agent consumption, net cost savings, and residual sevoflurane left in bottles to be discarded in the trash after filling vaporizers. The time from reaching a PICO2 = 3 mm Hg for 3 minutes until agent exhaustion (PICO2 = 5 mm Hg for 5 minutes) was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of N = 20,235 cases were analyzed (80.2% sevoflurane, 15.1% desflurane, and 4.7% isoflurane). Intraoperative FGF was reduced for cases in which sevoflurane was administered by 435 mL/min (95% confidence interval [CI], 391 to 479 mL/min; P < 10). Hypothesis 1 was accepted. Sevoflurane consumption per minute of administration decreased by 0.039 mL/min (95% CI, 0.029 to 0.049 mL/min; P < 10) after the change to the nonreactive absorbent. Hypothesis 2 was accepted. The difference in mean cost for the sum of the sevoflurane and absorbent purchases for each of the 10 4-week intervals before and after the absorbent switch was -$293 per 4-week interval (95% CI, -$2853 to $2266; P = 0.81). Hypothesis 3 was rejected. The average amount of residual sevoflurane per bottle was 0.67 ± 0.06 mL (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.81 mL per bottle; P < 10 vs 2.5 mL). Hypothesis 4 was accepted. Once the PICO2 reached 3 mm Hg for at least 3 consecutive minutes, the absorbent became exhausted within 95 minutes in most (i.e., >50%) canisters. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that an anesthesia department can transition to a premium, nonreactive carbon dioxide absorbent in a manner that is at least cost neutral by reducing FGF below the lower flow limits recommended in the sevoflurane package insert. This was achieved, in part, by electronically monitoring PICO2, automatically notifying the anesthesia technicians when to change the absorbent, and by providing personalized feedback via e-mail to the anesthesia providers.

Decreasing Diagnostic Hysteroscopy Performed in the Operating Room: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: At our institution, diagnostic hysteroscopy (DH), often combined with uterine curettage, commonly has been performed in the main OR with the patient under general anaesthesia. Our objective was to create targeted interventions aimed at decreasing the number of DHs performed in the OR by 75% over one year. METHODS: This quality improvement initiative had a quasi-experimental (time-series) design. To obtain baseline numbers of DHs performed each month, we conducted a retrospective chart audit at a university teaching hospital. We implemented the following three groups of interventions: (1) staff education and case review, (2) accessible sonohysterography, and (3) an operative hysteroscopy education program. Procedures were tracked prospectively over a 12-month intervention period and an additional 12-month maintenance period. RESULTS: One hundred eleven DHs were performed at baseline. During the intervention period, 33 DHs were performed, a 70% reduction from baseline. This resulted in related savings of $126 984 and 12.5 surgical days. In the final quarter of the intervention period, there was an 81% reduction in the number of DHs with adequate preoperative evaluation compared with baseline. Twenty DHs were performed in the maintenance period, an 82% reduction from baseline. The absolute number of complications from DH remained constant during the study period. CONCLUSION: Carefully planned and targeted interventions to change the culture at our institution decreased the number of DHs performed in the main OR. These initiatives improved patient care, saved costs, and improved OR utilization. Long-term follow-up showed maintenance of the improvements in the year subsequent to the interventions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Reduced Waiting Time for Head and Neck Cancer Patients due to a Lean Process Redesign.

BACKGROUND: Compared with new technologies, the redesign of care processes is generally considered less attractive to improve patient outcomes. Nevertheless, it might result in better patient outcomes, without further increasing costs. Because early initiation of treatment is of vital importance for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), these care processes were redesigned. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness of this redesign. METHODS: An economic (Markov) model was constructed to evaluate the biopsy process of suspicious lesion under local instead of general anesthesia, and combining computed tomography and positron emission tomography for diagnostics and radiotherapy planning. Patients treated for HNC were included in the model stratified by disease location (larynx, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and oral cavity) and stage (I-II and III-IV). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Waiting time before treatment start reduced from 5 to 22 days for the included patient groups, resulting in 0.13 to 0.66 additional quality-adjusted life-years. The new workflow was cost-effective for all the included patient groups, using a ceiling ratio of €80,000 or €20,000. For patients treated for tumors located at the larynx and oral cavity, the new workflow resulted in additional quality-adjusted life-years, and costs decreased compared with the regular workflow. The health care payer benefited €14.1 million and €91.5 million, respectively, when individual net monetary benefits were extrapolated to an organizational level and a national level. CONCLUSIONS: The redesigned care process reduced the waiting time for the treatment of patients with HNC and proved cost-effective. Because care improved, implementation on a wider scale should be considered.

The environmental impact of the Glostavent® anesthetic machine.

Because anesthetic machines have become more complex and more expensive, they have become less suitable for use in the many isolated hospitals in the poorest countries in the world. In these situations, they are frequently unable to function at all because of interruptions in the supply of oxygen or electricity and the absence of skilled technicians for maintenance and servicing. Despite these disadvantages, these machines are still delivered in large numbers, thereby expending precious resources without any benefit to patients. The Glostavent was introduced primarily to enable an anesthetic service to be delivered in these difficult circumstances. It is smaller and less complex than standard anesthetic machines and much less expensive to produce. It combines a drawover anesthetic system with an oxygen concentrator and a gas-driven ventilator. It greatly reduces the need for the purchase and transport of cylinders of compressed gases, reduces the impact on the environment, and enables considerable savings. Cylinder oxygen is expensive to produce and difficult to transport over long distances on poor roads. Consequently, the supply may run out. However, when using the Glostavent, oxygen is normally produced at a fraction of the cost of cylinders by the oxygen concentrator, which is an integral part of the Glostavent. This enables great savings in the purchase and transport cost of oxygen cylinders. If the electricity fails and the oxygen concentrator ceases to function, oxygen from a reserve cylinder automatically provides the pressure to drive the ventilator and oxygen for the breathing circuit. Consequently, economy is achieved because the ventilator has been designed to minimize the amount of driving gas required to one-seventh of the patient's tidal volume. Additional economies are achieved by completely eliminating spillage of oxygen from the breathing system and by recycling the driving gas into the breathing system to increase the Fraction of Inspired Oxygen (FIO2) at no extra cost. Savings also are accrued when using the drawover breathing system as the need for nitrous oxide, compressed air, and soda lime are eliminated. The Glostavent enables the administration of safe anesthesia to be continued when standard machines are unable to function and can do so with minimal harm to the environment.