Cargando…

Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease

BACKGROUND: Adoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease. METHODS: This i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Diaz, Sarah E., Lee, Yongjin F., Bastawrous, Amir L., Shih, I.-Fan, Lee, Shih-Hao, Li, Yanli, Cleary, Robert K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9485164/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35194661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09097-x
_version_ 1784792031223087104
author Diaz, Sarah E.
Lee, Yongjin F.
Bastawrous, Amir L.
Shih, I.-Fan
Lee, Shih-Hao
Li, Yanli
Cleary, Robert K.
author_facet Diaz, Sarah E.
Lee, Yongjin F.
Bastawrous, Amir L.
Shih, I.-Fan
Lee, Shih-Hao
Li, Yanli
Cleary, Robert K.
author_sort Diaz, Sarah E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of IBM(®) MarketScan(®) Database patients who underwent left or right colectomy for benign disease between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes included total health-care expenditures, resource utilization, and direct workdays lost up to 365 days following colectomy. The open surgical approach (OS) was compared to minimally invasive colectomy (MIS) with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic (LS) and robotic (RS) approaches using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Of 10,439 patients, 2531 (24.3%) had open, 6826 (65.4%) had laparoscopic, and 1082 (10.3%) had robotic colectomy. MIS patients had shorter length of stay (LOS; mean difference, − 1.71, p < 0.001) and lower average total expenditures (mean difference, − $2378, p < 0.001) compared with open patients during the index hospitalization. At 1 year, MIS patients had lower readmission rates, and fewer mean emergency and outpatient department visits than open patients, translating into additional savings of $5759 and 2.22 fewer days missed from work for health-care visits over the 365-day post-discharge period. Within MIS, RS patients had shorter LOS (mean difference, − 0.60, p < 0.001) and lower conversion-to-open rates (odds ratio, 0.31 p < 0.001) during the index hospitalization, and lower hospital outpatient visits (mean difference, − 0.31, p = 0.001) at 365 days than LS. CONCLUSION: MIS colectomy is associated with lower mean health-care expenditures and less resource utilization compared to the open approach for benign disease at index operation and 365-days post-discharge. Health-care expenditures for LS and RS are similar but shorter mean LOS and lower conversion-to-open surgery rates were observed at index operation for the RS approach. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09097-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9485164
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94851642022-09-21 Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease Diaz, Sarah E. Lee, Yongjin F. Bastawrous, Amir L. Shih, I.-Fan Lee, Shih-Hao Li, Yanli Cleary, Robert K. Surg Endosc Article BACKGROUND: Adoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of IBM(®) MarketScan(®) Database patients who underwent left or right colectomy for benign disease between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes included total health-care expenditures, resource utilization, and direct workdays lost up to 365 days following colectomy. The open surgical approach (OS) was compared to minimally invasive colectomy (MIS) with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic (LS) and robotic (RS) approaches using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Of 10,439 patients, 2531 (24.3%) had open, 6826 (65.4%) had laparoscopic, and 1082 (10.3%) had robotic colectomy. MIS patients had shorter length of stay (LOS; mean difference, − 1.71, p < 0.001) and lower average total expenditures (mean difference, − $2378, p < 0.001) compared with open patients during the index hospitalization. At 1 year, MIS patients had lower readmission rates, and fewer mean emergency and outpatient department visits than open patients, translating into additional savings of $5759 and 2.22 fewer days missed from work for health-care visits over the 365-day post-discharge period. Within MIS, RS patients had shorter LOS (mean difference, − 0.60, p < 0.001) and lower conversion-to-open rates (odds ratio, 0.31 p < 0.001) during the index hospitalization, and lower hospital outpatient visits (mean difference, − 0.31, p = 0.001) at 365 days than LS. CONCLUSION: MIS colectomy is associated with lower mean health-care expenditures and less resource utilization compared to the open approach for benign disease at index operation and 365-days post-discharge. Health-care expenditures for LS and RS are similar but shorter mean LOS and lower conversion-to-open surgery rates were observed at index operation for the RS approach. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09097-x. Springer US 2022-02-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9485164/ /pubmed/35194661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09097-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Diaz, Sarah E.
Lee, Yongjin F.
Bastawrous, Amir L.
Shih, I.-Fan
Lee, Shih-Hao
Li, Yanli
Cleary, Robert K.
Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title_full Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title_fullStr Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title_short Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
title_sort comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9485164/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35194661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09097-x
work_keys_str_mv AT diazsarahe comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT leeyongjinf comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT bastawrousamirl comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT shihifan comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT leeshihhao comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT liyanli comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease
AT clearyrobertk comparisonofhealthcareutilizationandexpendituresforminimallyinvasivevsopencolectomyforbenigndisease