ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Detailed evaluation and cost analysis of a cranial contrast-enhanced MRI (c-ceMRI) in outpatients, inpatients, patients in an intensive care unit and children under anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on a detailed process-oriented model, we calculated the cost of a cranial MRI for the four situations mentioned above. A comprehensive evaluation of the overhead and personnel costs was performed. RESULTS: We performed 5108 MRI examinations on 2 scanners in the year 2008. 2150 examinations (42 %) were identified as c-ceMRI. For inpatients we calculated a total cost of 242.46 per examination with a personnel cost of 81.71 for the radiological department. In outpatients we calculated total costs of 181.97 with radiological personnel costs of 68.67. Patients coming from an intensive care unit were treated by an intensive care team, which resulted in total costs of 416.58 with 283 in costs for radiological personnel (32.8 %). MRI examinations of children under anesthesia resulted in costs of 616.79 for the hospital, of which 285.78 were radiological personnel costs (34.5 %). CONCLUSION: In this study we evaluated for the first time different radiological scenarios of a c-ceMRI at a university hospital. Considering the present reimbursement situation, all outpatients covered by statutory health insurance resulted in a deficit for the hospital. Particularly high costs for patients in intensive care units as well as for children under anesthesia have to be taken into account and are currently not adequately covered by care providers.
Subject(s)
Brain/pathology , Contrast Media/economics , Hospitals, University/economics , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/economics , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/economics , Adult , Ambulatory Care/economics , Child , Contrast Media/administration & dosage , Costs and Cost Analysis , Germany , Hospital Costs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance Coverage/economics , Intensive Care Units/economics , National Health Programs/economics , Patient Care Team/economics , Radiology Department, Hospital/economics , Reimbursement Mechanisms/economics , Uncompensated Care/economicsABSTRACT
The scientific background of laser photocoagulation of the ocular fundus was studied extensively by several investigators in the 1970 s and 1980 s. The basic principles were successfully resolved during that time and clinical consequences for proper application of the laser photocoagulation for various diseases were deduced. The present paper gives an overview about the physical basics of laser-tissue interactions during and after retinal laser treatment and the particular laser strategies in the treatment of different retinal diseases. Thus, it addresses the issue of the impact on tissue of laser parameters as wavelength, spot size, pulse duration and laser power. Additionally, the different biological tissue reactions after laser treatment are presented, such as, e. g., for retinopexia or macular treatments as well as for diabetic retinopathies. Specific laser strategies such as the selective laser treatment of the RPE (SRT) or the transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT) are presented and discussed.
Subject(s)
Light Coagulation/methods , Retinal Diseases/surgery , Choroid/pathology , Choroid/surgery , Choroidal Neovascularization/diagnosis , Choroidal Neovascularization/surgery , Diabetic Retinopathy/diagnosis , Diabetic Retinopathy/surgery , Fluorescein Angiography , Humans , Macula Lutea/pathology , Macula Lutea/surgery , Ophthalmoscopy , Papilledema/surgery , Pigment Epithelium of Eye/pathology , Pigment Epithelium of Eye/surgery , Postoperative Complications/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Retina/pathology , Retina/surgery , Retinal Detachment/diagnosis , Retinal Detachment/surgery , Retinal Drusen/surgery , Retinal Perforations/diagnosis , Retinal Perforations/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Since 2004, inpatient health care for penetrating eye injuries in Germany had been paid according to the calculated DRG C01Z. Because the extent of treatment mainly derives from the extent of eye damage, this DRG economically summarises very heterogeneous cases. It was the aim to check the cost recovery for the surgical treatment of penetrating eye injuries at a university eye hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Performance data for the DRG C01Z were collected for the years 2005 and 2006 using the E1 sheets according to section sign21 KHEntG. Costs for single operations were calculated from fixed and variable costs for the operating theatre and the ward, including costs for personnel and supplies. RESULTS: In the 2-year period, out of 4,721 inpatient procedures, 180 perforating eye injuries were surgically treated. In 80 cases, a pure corneal/scleral suture (plus cataract surgery, n=10; mean operating time 67.81 min) was performed. In the other 100 cases, a pars plana vitrectomy (ppV) with adjuvant measures (mean operating time 124.69 min) was needed. Each operation had fixed surgical costs of EUR 130.60; variable costs, including personnel and supplies, varied between EUR 570 for corneal/scleral suture (+/-EUR 250 for combined cataract surgery (n=10) and EUR 1230 (mean) for a ppV. Cost-effective additional adjuncts such as cerclage, perfluorocarbon, gas, silicone oil, or cataract surgery led to extra costs of between EUR 51 and EUR 250 per adjunct (mean EUR 182). At least two of these adjuncts were used in 50% of ppVs, and at least one was used in 90% of ppVs. Hospitalisation costs were about EUR 2184 (EUR 273 per day), with a mean stay of 8 days. The overall costs of an operation for penetrating eye injuries differed significantly in terms of the procedure (corneal/scleral suture: EUR 2662, mean length of stay 7.06 days; ppV: EUR 3712, mean length of stay 8.62 days). Additional costs for multiple surgeries, as occurred in 11.1% of all cases, were not compensated by the DRG system. CONCLUSION: In consideration of a relative DRG weight of 1,177 and a base rate of EUR 2723.79 in Bavaria for 2005 and 2006, perforating eye injuries were compensated within the C01Z DRG at EUR 3205,96. Thus, for ppVs no costs are recovered, whereas "pure suture" procedures are overweighted. Due to this inhomogeneity, a split in the C01Z DRG is necessary.