World journal of surgery · 2016
Cost Effectiveness of a Fast-Track Protocol for Urgent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies and Appendectomies.
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.
Trevino Colleen M, Katchko Karina M, Verhaalen Amy L, Bruce Marie L, Webb Travis P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Fast-track protocols (FTPs) are used to decrease length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective outpatient procedures. Few institutions have implemented FTP for urgent procedures such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).
STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study including all patients undergoing urgent LC or LA between July 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013. Exclusion criteria included conversion to open procedure, perforated appendicitis, or procedure related to intra-abdominal injury. Analysis included a comparison of the three study groups: (1) before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation of the fast-track protocol (FTP), (2) fast-track cohort (FT) and non-fast-track cohort (NFT), and (3) those completing the fast-track pathway (FT-C) and those who began but failed to complete the pathway (FT-F).
RESULTS: There were significant reductions in LOS between all study groups compared: between PRE (n = 256) and POST (n = 472) cohorts by half a day (2.0 vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.02); between FT and NFT (0.68 vs. 1.82 days, p < 0.01); and FT-C and FT-F (0.49 vs. 1.05 days, p < 0.01). Total hospital charges were significantly reduced in FT compared with NFT ($22,347 vs. $30,868, p < 0.01) with an average savings of $8521. Total hospital charges were decreased in the FT-C compared with FT-F cohorts ($21,971 vs. $22,939, p = 0.3) with an average savings of $968. Readmissions, complications, and satisfaction were similar for all comparison groups.
CONCLUSIONS: FTPs for urgent appendectomies and cholecystectomies can significantly reduce hospital costs by reducing LOS without compromising patient outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study including all patients undergoing urgent LC or LA between July 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013. Exclusion criteria included conversion to open procedure, perforated appendicitis, or procedure related to intra-abdominal injury. Analysis included a comparison of the three study groups: (1) before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation of the fast-track protocol (FTP), (2) fast-track cohort (FT) and non-fast-track cohort (NFT), and (3) those completing the fast-track pathway (FT-C) and those who began but failed to complete the pathway (FT-F).
RESULTS: There were significant reductions in LOS between all study groups compared: between PRE (n = 256) and POST (n = 472) cohorts by half a day (2.0 vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.02); between FT and NFT (0.68 vs. 1.82 days, p < 0.01); and FT-C and FT-F (0.49 vs. 1.05 days, p < 0.01). Total hospital charges were significantly reduced in FT compared with NFT ($22,347 vs. $30,868, p < 0.01) with an average savings of $8521. Total hospital charges were decreased in the FT-C compared with FT-F cohorts ($21,971 vs. $22,939, p = 0.3) with an average savings of $968. Readmissions, complications, and satisfaction were similar for all comparison groups.
CONCLUSIONS: FTPs for urgent appendectomies and cholecystectomies can significantly reduce hospital costs by reducing LOS without compromising patient outcomes.