Academic radiology · 2020
Comparing the Safety and Cost of Image-Guided Percutaneous Gastrostomy Tube Placement in the Outpatient Versus Overnight Observation Setting in a Single-Center Retrospective Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Dolan Ryan S, Duszak Richard, Bercu Zachary L, Martin Jonathan G, Newsome Janice, Kokabi Nima
Аннотация
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Historically, patients undergoing image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement have been admitted overnight with feeds commencing 12-24 hours postprocedure. With new expedited feeding protocols starting 3-4 hours postprocedure, same-day discharge is now possible. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and cost of image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement as an outpatient procedure.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 131 patients (age 63.9 ± 11.6; 34% female) underwent gastrostomy tube placement as an outpatient procedure with expedited feeding protocol versus 40 patients (age 61.3 ± 12.6; 38% female) who were hospitalized overnight with feeds starting at 12-24 hours, primarily based on operator preference. The two groups were compared regarding complications within 90 days of procedure. Using a subgroup of 33 consecutive patients, procedural costs (total combined insurer and patient payments for professional and hospital services) for outpatients vs. hospitalized patients were compared.
RESULTS: Complication rates were similar (p = 0.64) for gastrostomy tubes placed on outpatients (0.17 complications/procedure: 4 bleeding, 2 aspiration pneumonia, 1 abdominal abscess, 4 significant pain, 6 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 4 malpositioned/fractured tubes) and hospitalized patients (0.20 complications/procedure: 1 aspiration pneumonia, 1 significant pain, 3 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 2 fractured tubes). Total combined insurer and patient payments were similar ($2193/outpatient vs $2701/hospitalized patient; p= 0.52).
CONCLUSION: Outpatient image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement with an expedited feeding protocol is a safe and cost-comparable alternative to historic overnight hospitalization. Further prospective investigation with a larger sample is warranted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 131 patients (age 63.9 ± 11.6; 34% female) underwent gastrostomy tube placement as an outpatient procedure with expedited feeding protocol versus 40 patients (age 61.3 ± 12.6; 38% female) who were hospitalized overnight with feeds starting at 12-24 hours, primarily based on operator preference. The two groups were compared regarding complications within 90 days of procedure. Using a subgroup of 33 consecutive patients, procedural costs (total combined insurer and patient payments for professional and hospital services) for outpatients vs. hospitalized patients were compared.
RESULTS: Complication rates were similar (p = 0.64) for gastrostomy tubes placed on outpatients (0.17 complications/procedure: 4 bleeding, 2 aspiration pneumonia, 1 abdominal abscess, 4 significant pain, 6 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 4 malpositioned/fractured tubes) and hospitalized patients (0.20 complications/procedure: 1 aspiration pneumonia, 1 significant pain, 3 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 2 fractured tubes). Total combined insurer and patient payments were similar ($2193/outpatient vs $2701/hospitalized patient; p= 0.52).
CONCLUSION: Outpatient image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement with an expedited feeding protocol is a safe and cost-comparable alternative to historic overnight hospitalization. Further prospective investigation with a larger sample is warranted.