Cargando…
A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic strip craniectomy with helmeting (ESCH) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious alternative to fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) for selected children with craniosynostosis. In addition to clinical factors, there may be economic benefits from the use of ESCH instead of FOR...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32158870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.01.010 |
_version_ | 1783504432590225408 |
---|---|
author | Jivraj, B.A. Ahmed, N. Karia, K. Menon, R. Robertson, E. Sodha, A. Wormald, J.C.R. O'hara, J. Jeelani, O. Dunaway, D. James, G. Ong, J. |
author_facet | Jivraj, B.A. Ahmed, N. Karia, K. Menon, R. Robertson, E. Sodha, A. Wormald, J.C.R. O'hara, J. Jeelani, O. Dunaway, D. James, G. Ong, J. |
author_sort | Jivraj, B.A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic strip craniectomy with helmeting (ESCH) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious alternative to fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) for selected children with craniosynostosis. In addition to clinical factors, there may be economic benefits from the use of ESCH instead of FOR. METHODS: A retrospective review of 23 patients with nonsyndromic unicoronal craniosynostosis (UCS) treated with FOR was carried out at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for Children in London, UK. Secondary data were used for the ESCH cohort from a paper published by Jimenez and Barone (2013). Data were collected on surgical time, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, adverse event rates, reintervention rates, and overall costs. Costs were categorized and then assigned to the appropriate data sets. RESULTS: The mean age of patients undergoing FOR (vs. ESCH) was 17.4 mo (vs. 3.1 mo) with a mean surgical time of 234 min (vs. 55 min), mean transfusion volume of 221.6 mL (vs. 80.0 mL), mean transfusion rate of 14/23 (vs. 2/115), and a total immediate overnight stay of 3.13 days (vs. 97% next-day discharge). The FOR group had a higher adverse event rate (5/23 vs. 4/115, p=<0.005) and a higher number requiring extraocular muscle surgery (4/23 vs. 7/109, p=0.16). There was a substantial difference in overall costs between the two groups. Total variance cost for the FOR group was £7436.5 vs. £4951.35, representing a cost difference of £2485.15 over the 24-month study period. CONCLUSION: ESCH, in comparison to FOR, appears as a more economical method in the management of USC patients, as well as having clinical benefits including reduced adverse event rate and improved ophthalmic outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7061657 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70616572020-03-10 A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review Jivraj, B.A. Ahmed, N. Karia, K. Menon, R. Robertson, E. Sodha, A. Wormald, J.C.R. O'hara, J. Jeelani, O. Dunaway, D. James, G. Ong, J. JPRAS Open Original Article INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic strip craniectomy with helmeting (ESCH) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious alternative to fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) for selected children with craniosynostosis. In addition to clinical factors, there may be economic benefits from the use of ESCH instead of FOR. METHODS: A retrospective review of 23 patients with nonsyndromic unicoronal craniosynostosis (UCS) treated with FOR was carried out at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for Children in London, UK. Secondary data were used for the ESCH cohort from a paper published by Jimenez and Barone (2013). Data were collected on surgical time, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, adverse event rates, reintervention rates, and overall costs. Costs were categorized and then assigned to the appropriate data sets. RESULTS: The mean age of patients undergoing FOR (vs. ESCH) was 17.4 mo (vs. 3.1 mo) with a mean surgical time of 234 min (vs. 55 min), mean transfusion volume of 221.6 mL (vs. 80.0 mL), mean transfusion rate of 14/23 (vs. 2/115), and a total immediate overnight stay of 3.13 days (vs. 97% next-day discharge). The FOR group had a higher adverse event rate (5/23 vs. 4/115, p=<0.005) and a higher number requiring extraocular muscle surgery (4/23 vs. 7/109, p=0.16). There was a substantial difference in overall costs between the two groups. Total variance cost for the FOR group was £7436.5 vs. £4951.35, representing a cost difference of £2485.15 over the 24-month study period. CONCLUSION: ESCH, in comparison to FOR, appears as a more economical method in the management of USC patients, as well as having clinical benefits including reduced adverse event rate and improved ophthalmic outcomes. Elsevier 2019-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7061657/ /pubmed/32158870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.01.010 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Jivraj, B.A. Ahmed, N. Karia, K. Menon, R. Robertson, E. Sodha, A. Wormald, J.C.R. O'hara, J. Jeelani, O. Dunaway, D. James, G. Ong, J. A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title | A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title_full | A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title_fullStr | A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title_full_unstemmed | A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title_short | A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review |
title_sort | 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: a retrospective bi-institutional review |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32158870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.01.010 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jivrajba a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT ahmedn a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT kariak a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT menonr a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT robertsone a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT sodhaa a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT wormaldjcr a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT oharaj a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT jeelanio a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT dunawayd a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT jamesg a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT ongj a24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT jivrajba 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT ahmedn 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT kariak 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT menonr 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT robertsone 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT sodhaa 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT wormaldjcr 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT oharaj 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT jeelanio 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT dunawayd 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT jamesg 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview AT ongj 24monthcostandoutcomeanalysiscomparingtraditionalfrontoorbitaladvancmentandremodelingwithendoscopicstripcraniectomyandmoldinghelmetinthemanagementofunicoronalcraniosynostosisaretrospectivebiinstitutionalreview |