IMPORTANCE: As many surgical procedures have undergone a transition from a standard, open surgical approach to a minimally invasive one in the past 2 decades, the diffusion of minimally invasive surgery may have had sizeable but overlooked effects on medical expenditures and worker productivity. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of standard vs minimally invasive surgery on health plan spending and workplace absenteeism for 6 types of surgery. DESIGN: Cross-sectional regression analysis. SETTING: National health insurance claims data and matched workplace absenteeism data from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of adults with employer-sponsored health insurance who underwent either standard or minimally invasive surgery for coronary revascularization, uterine fibroid resection, prostatectomy, peripheral revascularization, carotid revascularization, or aortic aneurysm repair. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Health plan spending and workplace absenteeism from 14 days before through 352 days after the index surgery. RESULTS: There were 321,956 patients who underwent surgery; 23,814 were employees with workplace absenteeism data. After multivariable adjustment, mean health plan spending was lower for minimally invasive surgery for coronary revascularization (-$30,850; 95% CI, -$31,629 to -$30,091), uterine fibroid resection (-$1509; 95% CI, -$1754 to -$1280), and peripheral revascularization (-$12,031; 95% CI, -$15,552 to -$8717) and higher for prostatectomy ($1350; 95% CI, $611 to $2212) and carotid revascularization ($4900; 95% CI, $1772 to $8370). Undergoing minimally invasive surgery was associated with missing significantly fewer days of work for coronary revascularization (mean difference, -37.7 days; 95% CI, -41.1 to -34.3), uterine fibroid resection (mean difference, -11.7 days; 95% CI, -14.0 to -9.4), prostatectomy (mean difference, -9.0 days; 95% CI, -14.2 to -3.7), and peripheral revascularization (mean difference, -16.6 days; 95% CI, -28.0 to -5.2). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For 3 of 6 types of surgery studied, minimally invasive procedures were associated with significantly lower health plan spending than standard surgery. For 4 types of surgery, minimally invasive procedures were consistently associated with significantly fewer days of absence from work.
IMPORTANCE: As many surgical procedures have undergone a transition from a standard, open surgical approach to a minimally invasive one in the past 2 decades, the diffusion of minimally invasive surgery may have had sizeable but overlooked effects on medical expenditures and worker productivity. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of standard vs minimally invasive surgery on health plan spending and workplace absenteeism for 6 types of surgery. DESIGN: Cross-sectional regression analysis. SETTING: National health insurance claims data and matched workplace absenteeism data from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of adults with employer-sponsored health insurance who underwent either standard or minimally invasive surgery for coronary revascularization, uterine fibroid resection, prostatectomy, peripheral revascularization, carotid revascularization, or aortic aneurysm repair. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Health plan spending and workplace absenteeism from 14 days before through 352 days after the index surgery. RESULTS: There were 321,956 patients who underwent surgery; 23,814 were employees with workplace absenteeism data. After multivariable adjustment, mean health plan spending was lower for minimally invasive surgery for coronary revascularization (-$30,850; 95% CI, -$31,629 to -$30,091), uterine fibroid resection (-$1509; 95% CI, -$1754 to -$1280), and peripheral revascularization (-$12,031; 95% CI, -$15,552 to -$8717) and higher for prostatectomy ($1350; 95% CI, $611 to $2212) and carotid revascularization ($4900; 95% CI, $1772 to $8370). Undergoing minimally invasive surgery was associated with missing significantly fewer days of work for coronary revascularization (mean difference, -37.7 days; 95% CI, -41.1 to -34.3), uterine fibroid resection (mean difference, -11.7 days; 95% CI, -14.0 to -9.4), prostatectomy (mean difference, -9.0 days; 95% CI, -14.2 to -3.7), and peripheral revascularization (mean difference, -16.6 days; 95% CI, -28.0 to -5.2). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For 3 of 6 types of surgery studied, minimally invasive procedures were associated with significantly lower health plan spending than standard surgery. For 4 types of surgery, minimally invasive procedures were consistently associated with significantly fewer days of absence from work.
Authors: Fong W Liu; Valerie B Galvan-Turner; Krista S Pfaendler; Teresa C Longoria; Robert E Bristow Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-01-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Florian Rudolf Schroeck; Bruce L Jacobs; Sam B Bhayani; Paul L Nguyen; David Penson; Jim Hu Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-03-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Darren de Sa; Nolan S Horner; Austin MacDonald; Nicole Simunovic; Gerard Slobogean; Marc J Philippon; Etienne L Belzile; Jon Karlsson; Olufemi R Ayeni Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-08-01 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Angela Wang; Stephanie L Dybul; Parag J Patel; Sean M Tutton; Cheong J Lee; Sarah B White Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Xue Song; Ruben G W Quek; Shravanthi R Gandra; Katherine A Cappell; Robert Fowler; Ze Cong Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 2.655