Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2023
One-stage vs two-stage bilateral THA in Lombardy: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pironti Pierluigi, Ambrosanio Andrea, Vismara Valeria, Viganò Marco, Bucci Eugenia, Sirtori Paolo, Peretti Giuseppe M, Mangiavini Laura
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the most common treatment for primary and secondary end-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA). Almost 20% of all patients undergoing primary THA suffer from bilateral hip OA and, consequently, will need a contralateral procedure to be performed in the following years. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and the reliability of one-stage bilateral THA (1-BTHA) compared to two-stage bilateral THA (2-BTHA), in low-risk patients, performed with anterior minimally invasive surgery (AMIS).
METHODS: Single patient's costs were obtained by dividing the annual costs report by the number of hospitalizations, considering the diagnosis related group (DRG) of the two procedures. Then, 16 patients undergoing 1-BTHA and 8 undergoing 2-BTHA were examined. Hemoglobin (Hb) values before surgery and before discharge, transfusion rate and the occurrence of post-operative complications were observed.
RESULTS: Procedural costs were divided in different subgroups: pre-hospitalization, operating room, hospital stay, post-operative follow-up and other costs. 1-BTHA total costs amount to 5.754,82€, while performing 2-BTHA costs 7.624,32€. However, considering DRG reimbursement, the hospital's profit margin following 1-BTHA is lower than that following 2-BTHA (6.346,18€ versus 9.261,68€). Surgical time was found not to be significantly different between 1-BTHA and 2-BTHA (141,13 ± 26,1 min vs 164,8 ± 44,3 min; p = 0,111). The two groups showed a statistically significant difference in Hb decrease (4,8 ± 1,3 g/dl vs 3,3 ± 0,9; p = 0,001), despite no variances in transfusion rate. No further complications were observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates how, in carefully selected patients, 1-BTHA performed with AMIS is a cost-effective and safe technique compared to 2-BTHA, resulting in a shorter OR time, LOS and lower overall costs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
METHODS: Single patient's costs were obtained by dividing the annual costs report by the number of hospitalizations, considering the diagnosis related group (DRG) of the two procedures. Then, 16 patients undergoing 1-BTHA and 8 undergoing 2-BTHA were examined. Hemoglobin (Hb) values before surgery and before discharge, transfusion rate and the occurrence of post-operative complications were observed.
RESULTS: Procedural costs were divided in different subgroups: pre-hospitalization, operating room, hospital stay, post-operative follow-up and other costs. 1-BTHA total costs amount to 5.754,82€, while performing 2-BTHA costs 7.624,32€. However, considering DRG reimbursement, the hospital's profit margin following 1-BTHA is lower than that following 2-BTHA (6.346,18€ versus 9.261,68€). Surgical time was found not to be significantly different between 1-BTHA and 2-BTHA (141,13 ± 26,1 min vs 164,8 ± 44,3 min; p = 0,111). The two groups showed a statistically significant difference in Hb decrease (4,8 ± 1,3 g/dl vs 3,3 ± 0,9; p = 0,001), despite no variances in transfusion rate. No further complications were observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates how, in carefully selected patients, 1-BTHA performed with AMIS is a cost-effective and safe technique compared to 2-BTHA, resulting in a shorter OR time, LOS and lower overall costs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.