Dataset Information

Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Surgical supplies occupy a large portion of health care expenditures but is often under the surgeon's control. We sought to assess whether an automated, surgeon-directed, cost feedback system can decrease supply expenditures for five common general surgery procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS:An automated "surgical receipt" detailing intraoperative supply costs was generated and emailed to surgeons after each case. We compared the median cost per case for 18 mo before and after implementation of the surgical receipt. We controlled for price fluctuations by applying common per-unit prices in both periods. We also compared the incision time, case length booking accuracy, length of stay, and postoperative occurrences. RESULTS:Median costs decreased significantly for open inguinal hernia ($433.45 to $385.49, P < 0.001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy ($886.77 to $816.13, P = 0.002), and thyroidectomy ($861.21 to $825.90, P = 0.034). Median costs were unchanged for laparoscopic appendectomy and increased significantly for lumpectomy ($325.67 to $420.53, P < 0.001). There was an increase in incision-to-closure minutes for open inguinal hernia (71 to 75 min, P < 0.001) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (75 to 96 min, P < 0.001), but a decrease in thyroidectomy (79 to 73 min, P < 0.001). There was an increase in booking accuracy for laparoscopic appendectomy (38.6% to 55.0%, P = 0.001) and thyroidectomy (32.5% to 48.1%, P = 0.001). There were no differences in postoperative occurrence rates and length of stay duration. CONCLUSIONS:An automated surgeon-directed surgical receipt may be a useful tool to decrease supply costs for certain procedures. However, curtailing surgical supply costs with surgeon-directed cost feedback alone is challenging and a multimodal approach may be necessary.

SUBMITTER: Zhao B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6377849 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

Zhao Beiqun B Tyree Griffin A GA Lin Timothy C TC Vaida Florin F Stock Blake J BJ Hamelin Thomas A TA Clary Bryan M BM

The Journal of surgical research 20181213

<h4>Background</h4>Surgical supplies occupy a large portion of health care expenditures but is often under the surgeon's control. We sought to assess whether an automated, surgeon-directed, cost feedback system can decrease supply expenditures for five common general surgery procedures.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>An automated "surgical receipt" detailing intraoperative supply costs was generated and emailed to surgeons after each case. We compared the median cost per case for 18 mo before and ...[more]

PMID: 30694743

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Increasing use of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures with limited evidence and unclear clinical benefit is raising concern. Analyses of population-based trends in practice and how hospitals' acquisition of robotic surgical technologies is associated with their use are limited. Objective:To characterize trends in the use of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study used clinical registry data from Michigan from January 1, 2012, through June 30, 2018. Trends were characterized in the use of robotic surgery for common procedures for which traditional laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery was already considered a safe and effective approach for most surgeons when clinically feasible. A multigroup interrupted time series analysis was performed to determine how procedural approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic) change after hospitals launch a robotic surgery program. Data were analyzed from March 1 through April 19, 2019. Exposures:Initiation of robotic surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures:Procedure approach (ie, robotic, open, or laparoscopic). Results:The study cohort included 169?404 patients (mean [SD] age, 55.4 [16.9] years; 90?595 women [53.5%]) at 73 hospitals. The use of robotic surgery increased from 1.8% in 2012 to 15.1% in 2018 (8.4-fold increase; slope, 2.1% per year; 95% CI, 1.9%-2.3%). For certain procedures, the magnitude of the increase was greater; for example, for inguinal hernia repair, the use of robotic surgery increased from 0.7% to 28.8% (41.1-fold change; slope, 5.4% per year; 95% CI, 5.1%-5.7%). The use of robotic surgery increased 8.8% in the first 4 years after hospitals began performing robotic surgery (2.8% per year; 95% CI, 2.7%-2.9%). This trend was associated with a decrease in laparoscopic surgery from 53.2% to 51.3% (difference, -1.9%; 95% CI, -2.2% to -1.6%). Before adopting robotic surgery, hospitals' use of laparoscopic surgery increased 1.3% per year. After adopting robotic surgery, the use of laparoscopic surgery declined 0.3% (difference in trends, -1.6%; 95% CI, -1.7% to -1.5%). Conclusions and Relevance:These results suggest that robotic surgery has continued to diffuse across a broad range of common surgical procedures. Hospitals that launched robotic surgery programs had a broad and immediate increase in the use of robotic surgery, which was associated with a decrease in traditional laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Support for guiding and monitoring postoperative recovery and resumption of activities is usually not provided to patients after discharge from the hospital. Therefore, a perioperative electronic health (eHealth) intervention ("ikherstel" intervention or "I recover" intervention) was developed to empower gynecological patients during the perioperative period. This eHealth intervention requires a need for further development for patients who will undergo various types of general surgical and gynecological procedures. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to further develop the "ikherstel" eHealth intervention using Intervention Mapping (IM) to fit a broader patient population. METHODS:The IM protocol was used to guide further development of the "ikherstel" intervention. First, patients' needs were identified using (1) the information of a process evaluation of the earlier performed "ikherstel" study, (2) a review of the literature, (3) a survey study, and (4) focus group discussions (FGDs) among stakeholders. Next, program outcomes and change objectives were defined. Third, behavior change theories and practical tools were selected for the intervention program. Finally, an implementation and evaluation plan was developed. RESULTS:The outcome for an eHealth intervention tool for patients recovering from abdominal general surgical and gynecological procedures was redefined as "achieving earlier recovery including return to normal activities and work." The Attitude-Social Influence-Self-Efficacy model was used as a theoretical framework to transform personal and external determinants into change objectives of personal behavior. The knowledge gathered by needs assessment and using the theoretical framework in the preparatory steps of the IM protocol resulted in additional tools. A mobile app, an activity tracker, and an electronic consultation (eConsult) will be incorporated in the further developed eHealth intervention. This intervention will be evaluated in a multicenter, single-blinded randomized controlled trial with 18 departments in 11 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. CONCLUSIONS:The intervention is extended to patients undergoing general surgical procedures and for malignant indications. New intervention tools such as a mobile app, an activity tracker, and an eConsult were developed. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Registry NTR5686; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5686.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients managed nonoperatively have been excluded from risk-adjusted benchmarking programs, including the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). Consequently, optimal performance evaluation is not possible for specialties like emergency general surgery (EGS) where nonoperative management is common. We developed a multi-institutional EGS clinical data registry within ACS NSQIP that includes patients managed nonoperatively to evaluate variability in nonoperative care across hospitals and identify gaps in performance assessment that occur when only operative cases are considered. METHODS:Using ACS NSQIP infrastructure and methodology, surgical consultations for acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, and small bowel obstruction (SBO) were sampled at 13 hospitals that volunteered to participate in the EGS clinical data registry. Standard NSQIP variables and 16 EGS-specific variables were abstracted with 30-day follow-up. To determine the influence of complications in nonoperative patients, rates of adverse outcomes were identified, and hospitals were ranked by performance with and then without including nonoperative cases. RESULTS:Two thousand ninety-one patients with EGS diagnoses were included, 46.6% with appendicitis, 24.3% with cholecystitis, and 29.1% with SBO. The overall rate of nonoperative management was 27.4%, 6.6% for appendicitis, 16.5% for cholecystitis, and 69.9% for SBO. Despite comprising only 27.4% of patients in the EGS pilot, nonoperative management accounted for 67.7% of deaths, 34.3% of serious morbidities, and 41.8% of hospital readmissions. After adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital diagnosis mix, addition of nonoperative management to hospital performance assessment resulted in 12 of 13 hospitals changing performance rank, with four hospitals changing by three or more positions. CONCLUSION:This study identifies a gap in performance evaluation when nonoperative patients are excluded from surgical quality assessment and demonstrates the feasibility of incorporating nonoperative care into existing surgical quality initiatives. Broadening the scope of hospital performance assessment to include nonoperative management creates an opportunity to improve the care of all surgical patients, not just those who have an operation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Care management, level IV; Epidemiologic, level III.

Dataset Information

Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

Publications

Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure