Cost-benefit analysis of an enhanced recovery protocol for pancreaticoduodenectomy

被引:65
|
作者
Joliat, G. -R. [1 ]
Labgaa, I. [1 ]
Petermann, D. [1 ]
Hubner, M. [1 ]
Griesser, A. -C. [2 ]
Demartines, N. [1 ]
Schaefer, M. [1 ]
机构
[1] CHU Vaudois, Univ Lausanne Hosp, Dept Visceral Surg, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
[2] CHU Vaudois, Univ Lausanne Hosp, Med Directorate, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
关键词
INTERNATIONAL STUDY-GROUP; PANCREATIC SURGERY; COLORECTAL SURGERY; CRITICAL PATHWAY; PROGRAM; CARE; CLASSIFICATION; IMPLEMENTATION; COMPLICATIONS; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1002/bjs.9957
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been shown to decrease complications and hospital stay. The cost-effectiveness of such programmes has been demonstrated for colorectal surgery. This study aimed to assess the economic outcomes of a standard ERAS programme for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Methods: ERAS for pancreaticoduodenectomy was implemented in October 2012. All consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy until October 2014 were recorded. This group was compared in terms of costs with a cohort of consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2010 and October 2012, before ERAS implementation. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative real costs were collected for each patient via the hospital administration. A bootstrap independent t test was used for comparison. ERAS-specific costs were integrated into the model. Results: The groups were well matched in terms of demographic and surgical details. The overall complication rate was 68 per cent (50 of 74 patients) and 82 per cent (71 of 87 patients) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P=0.046). Median hospital stay was lower in the ERAS group (15 versus 19 days; P=0.029). ERAS-specific costs were (sic) 922 per patient. Mean total costs were (sic) 56 083 per patient in the ERAS group and (sic) 63 821 per patient in the pre-ERAS group (P=0.273). The mean intensive care unit (ICU) and intermediate care costs were (sic) 9139 and (sic) 13 793 per patient for the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P=0.151). Conclusion: ERAS implementation for pancreaticoduodenectomy did not increase the costs in this cohort. Savings were noted in anaesthesia/operating room, medication and laboratory costs. Fewer patients in the ERAS group required an ICU stay.
引用
收藏
页码:1676 / 1683
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Liver Surgery
    Joliat, Gaetan-Romain
    Labgaa, Ismail
    Hubner, Martin
    Blanc, Catherine
    Griesser, Anne-Claude
    Schafer, Markus
    Demartines, Nicolas
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 40 (10) : 2441 - 2450
  • [2] Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Gastrectomy A Retrospective Controlled Analysis
    Luzuy-Guarnero, Valentine
    Gronnier, Caroline
    Figuereido, Sergio
    Mantziari, Styliani
    Schafer, Markus
    Demartines, Nicolas
    Allemann, Pierre
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 45 (11) : 3249 - 3257
  • [3] Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Gastrectomy A Retrospective Controlled Analysis
    Valentine Luzuy-Guarnero
    Caroline Gronnier
    Sergio Figuereido
    Styliani Mantziari
    Markus Schäfer
    Nicolas Demartines
    Pierre Allemann
    World Journal of Surgery, 2021, 45 : 3249 - 3257
  • [4] Cost-benefit analysis of enhanced recovery after hepatectomy in Chinese Han population
    Jing, Xiaolin
    Zhang, Bingyuan
    Xing, Shichao
    Tian, Liqi
    Wang, Xiufang
    Zhou, Meng
    Li, Jiangfeng
    MEDICINE, 2018, 97 (34)
  • [5] Letter to the Editor: 'Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Gastrectomy a Retrospective Controlled Analysis'
    Bradley, Alison
    Gratton, Ruth
    Chin, Mei Ying
    Waterson, Isla
    Wong, Li Siang
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 46 (04) : 969 - 970
  • [6] Optimization and cost-benefit analysis of product recovery cycles
    Giudice, F
    La Rosa, G
    Risitano, A
    DESIGN METHODS FOR PERFORMANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2001, : 629 - 636
  • [7] Cost-benefit analysis
    Miura, Grant
    NATURE CHEMICAL BIOLOGY, 2018, 14 (10) : 903 - 903
  • [8] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
    BJORNSTAD, P
    KJEMI, 1975, 35 (10): : 3 - 3
  • [9] Author's Reply: Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Controlled Analysis
    Luzuy-Guarnero, Valentine
    Schafer, Markus
    Demartines, Nicolas
    Allemann, Pierre
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 46 (04) : 971 - 972
  • [10] The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It
    Flyvbjerg, Bent
    Bester, Dirk W.
    JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2021, 12 (03) : 395 - 419