Literature DB >> 10947015

Cost and utilization impact of a clinical pathway for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

G A Porter1, P W Pisters, C Mansyur, A Bisanz, K Reyna, P Stanford, J E Lee, D B Evans.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: When implemented in several common surgical procedures, clinical pathways have been reported to reduce costs and resource utilization, while maintaining or improving patient care. However, there is little data to support their use in more complex surgery. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of clinical pathway implementation in patients undergoing elective pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) on cost and resource utilization.
METHODS: Outcome data from before and after the development of a clinical pathway were analyzed. The clinical pathway standardized the preoperative outpatient care, critical care, and postoperative floor care of patients who underwent PD. An independent department determined total costs for each patient, which included all hospital and physician costs, in a blinded review. Outcomes that were examined included perioperative mortality, postoperative morbidity, length of stay, readmissions, and postoperative clinic visits.
RESULTS: From January, 1996 to December, 1998, 148 consecutive patients underwent PD or total pancreatectomy; 68 before pathway development (PrePath) and 80 after pathway implementation (PostPath). There were no significant differences in patient demographics, comorbid conditions, underlying diagnosis, or use of neoadjuvant therapy between the two groups. Mean total costs were significantly reduced in PostPath patients compared with PrePath patients ($36,627 vs. $47,515; P = .003). Similarly, mean length of hospital stay was also significantly reduced in PostPath patients (13.5 vs. 16.4 days; P = .001). The total cost differences could not be attributed solely to differences in room and board costs. Cost and length-of-stay differences remained when outliers were excluded from the analysis. Despite these findings, there were no significant differences between PrePath and PostPath patients in terms of perioperative mortality (3% vs. 1%), readmissions within 1 month of discharge (15% vs. 11%), or mean number of clinic visits within 90 days of discharge (3.3 vs. 3.4 visits).
CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of a clinical pathway for PD patients dramatically reduced costs and resource utilization without any apparent detrimental effect on quality of patient care. These findings support the implementation of clinical pathways for PD patients, as well as investigation into pathway care for other complex surgical procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10947015     DOI: 10.1007/s10434-000-0484-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  56 in total

Review 1.  Fast-track programmes for hepatopancreatic resections: where do we stand?

Authors:  Lidewij Spelt; Daniel Ansari; Christian Sturesson; Bobby Tingstedt; Roland Andersson
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2011-09-26       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Hospital readmission after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Dawn M Emick; Taylor S Riall; John L Cameron; Jordan M Winter; Keith D Lillemoe; Joann Coleman; Patricia K Sauter; Charles J Yeo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Outcomes in oncologic surgery: does volume make a difference?

Authors:  David J Bentrem; Murray F Brennan
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Compliance and efficiency before and after implementation of a clinical practice guideline for laryngeal carcinomas.

Authors:  Michel van Agthoven; Hélène A G Heule-Dieleman; Paul P Knegt; Johannes H A M Kaanders; Robert J Baatenburg de Jong; Bernd Kremer; C René Leemans; Henri A M Marres; Johannes J Manni; Johannes A Langendijk; Peter C Levendag; Reina E Tjho-Heslinga; Joseph M A de Jong; Maarten F de Boer; Carin A Uyl-de Groot
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2006-05-14       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 5.  Therapeutic strategies for the management of delayed gastric emptying after pancreatic resection.

Authors:  Dimitrios Lytras; Kosmas I Paraskevas; Costas Avgerinos; Costas Manes; Zisis Touloumis; Konstantina D Paraskeva; Christos Dervenis
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 3.445

6.  Academic Pancreas Centers of Excellence: Guidance from a multidisciplinary chronic pancreatitis working group at PancreasFest.

Authors:  Sunil G Sheth; Darwin L Conwell; David C Whitcomb; Matthew Alsante; Michelle A Anderson; Jamie Barkin; Randall Brand; Gregory A Cote; Steven D Freedman; Andres Gelrud; Fred Gorelick; Linda S Lee; Katherine Morgan; Stephen Pandol; Vikesh K Singh; Dhiraj Yadav; C Mel Wilcox; Phil A Hart
Journal:  Pancreatology       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 3.996

Review 7.  Clinical Pathways in surgery: should we introduce them into clinical routine? A review article.

Authors:  Ulrich Ronellenfitsch; Eric Rössner; Jens Jakob; Stefan Post; Peter Hohenberger; Matthias Schwarzbach
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-02-23       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Impact of clinical pathways in surgery.

Authors:  Markus K Müller; Konstantin J Dedes; Daniel Dindo; Stefan Steiner; Dieter Hahnloser; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-06-03       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  Surgical process improvement tools: defining quality gaps and priority areas in gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

Authors:  A C Wei; K S Devitt; M Wiebe; O F Bathe; R S McLeod; D R Urbach
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.677

10.  Readmission following pancreatectomy: what can be improved?

Authors:  Charity C Glass; Stephen P Gondek; Charles M Vollmer; Mark P Callery; Tara S Kent
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 3.647

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.