Cargando…

The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has many clinical advantages but high costs, raising the issue of healthcare sustainability. This study aims to a comparative analysis of the value, in terms of costs and outcomes, of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery for uterine cancer in a University Hospita...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Specchia, ML, Arcuri, G, Di Pilla, A, La Gatta, E, Osti, T, Limongelli, P, Scambia, G, Bellantone, RDA
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9594692/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac131.285
_version_ 1784815483748352000
author Specchia, ML
Arcuri, G
Di Pilla, A
La Gatta, E
Osti, T
Limongelli, P
Scambia, G
Bellantone, RDA
author_facet Specchia, ML
Arcuri, G
Di Pilla, A
La Gatta, E
Osti, T
Limongelli, P
Scambia, G
Bellantone, RDA
author_sort Specchia, ML
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has many clinical advantages but high costs, raising the issue of healthcare sustainability. This study aims to a comparative analysis of the value, in terms of costs and outcomes, of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery for uterine cancer in a University Hospital. METHODS: An observational retrospective study was carried out on hospitalizations between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Oct 2021 for uterine cancer surgery. DRG amount, costs, economic margins and 30-days readmissions percentage (mean values and 95% CIs) were calculated for robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgery. Student’s t and Chi-square tests were used to assess differences and the break-even point was calculated. RESULTS: 1336 hospitalizations were analyzed, 366 with robotic, 591 with laparoscopic, and 379 with laparotomy surgery. Robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and laparotomy ones showed a significant difference (p < 0,001) for economic margin, which was largely negative (-1069.18 €; 95%CI: -1240.44 - -897.92 €) mainly due to devices cost (3549.37 €; 95%CI: 3459.32 € - 3639.43 €), and a lower 30-days readmissions percentage (1.4%; 95%CI: 0.2% - 2.6%) with a significant difference only versus laparotomy (p = 0.029). Laparoscopic compared to laparotomy surgery showed a significantly (p < 0,001) more profitable economic margin (1692.21 €; 95%CI: 1531.75 € - 1852.66 €) without a significant difference for 30-days readmissions. The break-even analysis showed that, on average, for every uterine cancer laparoscopic elective surgery, 1.58 elective robotic surgeries are sustainable for the hospital (95% CI: 1.23 - 2.06). CONCLUSIONS: The systematic application of the break-even analysis will allow defining over time the right distribution of robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgeries’ volumes to perform in order to ensure both quality and economic-financial balance and therefore value of uterine oncological surgery in the University Hospital. KEY MESSAGES: • The value-based healthcare approach, defined as the measured improvement in a patient’s health outcomes in relation to its cost, finds effective application in uterine cancer surgery. • The use of the break-even approach allows to promote the value-based view by identifying a useful criterion for the planning and governance of interventions for uterine malignancies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9594692
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95946922022-11-22 The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis Specchia, ML Arcuri, G Di Pilla, A La Gatta, E Osti, T Limongelli, P Scambia, G Bellantone, RDA Eur J Public Health Poster Displays BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has many clinical advantages but high costs, raising the issue of healthcare sustainability. This study aims to a comparative analysis of the value, in terms of costs and outcomes, of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery for uterine cancer in a University Hospital. METHODS: An observational retrospective study was carried out on hospitalizations between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Oct 2021 for uterine cancer surgery. DRG amount, costs, economic margins and 30-days readmissions percentage (mean values and 95% CIs) were calculated for robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgery. Student’s t and Chi-square tests were used to assess differences and the break-even point was calculated. RESULTS: 1336 hospitalizations were analyzed, 366 with robotic, 591 with laparoscopic, and 379 with laparotomy surgery. Robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and laparotomy ones showed a significant difference (p < 0,001) for economic margin, which was largely negative (-1069.18 €; 95%CI: -1240.44 - -897.92 €) mainly due to devices cost (3549.37 €; 95%CI: 3459.32 € - 3639.43 €), and a lower 30-days readmissions percentage (1.4%; 95%CI: 0.2% - 2.6%) with a significant difference only versus laparotomy (p = 0.029). Laparoscopic compared to laparotomy surgery showed a significantly (p < 0,001) more profitable economic margin (1692.21 €; 95%CI: 1531.75 € - 1852.66 €) without a significant difference for 30-days readmissions. The break-even analysis showed that, on average, for every uterine cancer laparoscopic elective surgery, 1.58 elective robotic surgeries are sustainable for the hospital (95% CI: 1.23 - 2.06). CONCLUSIONS: The systematic application of the break-even analysis will allow defining over time the right distribution of robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgeries’ volumes to perform in order to ensure both quality and economic-financial balance and therefore value of uterine oncological surgery in the University Hospital. KEY MESSAGES: • The value-based healthcare approach, defined as the measured improvement in a patient’s health outcomes in relation to its cost, finds effective application in uterine cancer surgery. • The use of the break-even approach allows to promote the value-based view by identifying a useful criterion for the planning and governance of interventions for uterine malignancies. Oxford University Press 2022-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9594692/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac131.285 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Poster Displays
Specchia, ML
Arcuri, G
Di Pilla, A
La Gatta, E
Osti, T
Limongelli, P
Scambia, G
Bellantone, RDA
The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title_full The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title_fullStr The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title_full_unstemmed The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title_short The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis
title_sort value of uterine oncological surgery in a university hospital. results of a break-even analysis
topic Poster Displays
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9594692/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac131.285
work_keys_str_mv AT specchiaml thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT arcurig thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT dipillaa thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT lagattae thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT ostit thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT limongellip thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT scambiag thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT bellantonerda thevalueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT specchiaml valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT arcurig valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT dipillaa valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT lagattae valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT ostit valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT limongellip valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT scambiag valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis
AT bellantonerda valueofuterineoncologicalsurgeryinauniversityhospitalresultsofabreakevenanalysis