Cargando…

Cost comparison of orthopaedic fracture pathways using discrete event simulation in a Glasgow hospital

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare faces the continual challenge of improving outcome while aiming to reduce cost. The aim of this study was to determine the micro cost differences of the Glasgow non-operative trauma virtual pathway in comparison to a traditional pathway. DESIGN: Discrete event simulation was us...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Gillian H, Jenkins, Paul J, McDonald, David A, Van Der Meer, Robert, Morton, Alec, Nugent, Margaret, Rymaszewski, Lech A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5595193/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28882905
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014509
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Healthcare faces the continual challenge of improving outcome while aiming to reduce cost. The aim of this study was to determine the micro cost differences of the Glasgow non-operative trauma virtual pathway in comparison to a traditional pathway. DESIGN: Discrete event simulation was used to model and analyse cost and resource utilisation with an activity-based costing approach. Data for a full comparison before the process change was unavailable so we used a modelling approach, comparing a virtual fracture clinic (VFC) with a simulated traditional fracture clinic (TFC). SETTING: The orthopaedic unit VFC pathway pioneered at Glasgow Royal Infirmary has attracted significant attention and interest and is the focus of this cost study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Our study focused exclusively on patients with non-operative trauma attending emergency department or the minor injuries unit and the subsequent step in the patient pathway. Retrospective studies of patient outcomes as a result of the protocol introductions for specific injuries are presented in association with activity costs from the models. RESULTS: Patients are satisfied with the new pathway, the information provided and the outcome of their injuries (Evidence Level IV). There was a 65% reduction in the number of first outpatient face-to-face (f2f) attendances in orthopaedics. In the VFC pathway, the resources required per day were significantly lower for all staff groups (p≤0.001). The overall cost per patient of the VFC pathway was £22.84 (95% CI 21.74 to 23.92) per patient compared with £36.81 (95% CI 35.65 to 37.97) for the TFC pathway. CONCLUSIONS: Our results give a clearer picture of the cost comparison of the virtual pathway over a wholly traditional f2f clinic system. The use of simulation-based stochastic costings in healthcare economic analysis has been limited to date, but this study provides evidence for adoption of this method as a basis for its application in other healthcare settings.