David B Stewart1, Arthur Berg, Evangelos Messaris. 1. Department of Surgery/Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey Medical Center, 500 University Drive, P.O. Box 850, H137, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA, dstewart@hmc.psu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study sought to compare the length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective single-site (SSL) and standard laparoscopic (SDL) colorectal resections performed at a tertiary referral center. METHODS: An IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study of all elective SDL and SSL colorectal resections performed from 2008 to 2012 was undertaken. Patient charges and inflation adjusted hospital costs (US dollars) were compared with costs subcategorized by operating room expense, room and board, and pharmacy and radiology utilization. RESULTS: A total of 149 SDL and 111 SSL cases were identified. Compared with SSL, SDL surgeries were associated with longer median operative times (SSL: 153 min vs. SDL: 189 min, p = 0.001); however, median operating room costs were similar (p > 0.05). Median postoperative LOS was similar for both groups (SSL: 3 days; SDL: 4 days; p > 0.05). There was no difference between SSL and SDL with respect to either total patient charges (SSL: $34,847 vs. SDL: $38,306; p > 0.05) or hospital costs (SSL: $13,051 vs. SDL: $12,703; p > 0.05). Median costs during readmission were lower for SSL patients (SSL: $3,625 vs. SDL: $6,203, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: SSL provides similar LOS as well as similar costs to both patients and hospitals compared with SDL, making it a cost-feasible alternative.
BACKGROUND: The present study sought to compare the length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective single-site (SSL) and standard laparoscopic (SDL) colorectal resections performed at a tertiary referral center. METHODS: An IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study of all elective SDL and SSL colorectal resections performed from 2008 to 2012 was undertaken. Patient charges and inflation adjusted hospital costs (US dollars) were compared with costs subcategorized by operating room expense, room and board, and pharmacy and radiology utilization. RESULTS: A total of 149 SDL and 111 SSL cases were identified. Compared with SSL, SDL surgeries were associated with longer median operative times (SSL: 153 min vs. SDL: 189 min, p = 0.001); however, median operating room costs were similar (p > 0.05). Median postoperative LOS was similar for both groups (SSL: 3 days; SDL: 4 days; p > 0.05). There was no difference between SSL and SDL with respect to either total patient charges (SSL: $34,847 vs. SDL: $38,306; p > 0.05) or hospital costs (SSL: $13,051 vs. SDL: $12,703; p > 0.05). Median costs during readmission were lower for SSL patients (SSL: $3,625 vs. SDL: $6,203, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: SSL provides similar LOS as well as similar costs to both patients and hospitals compared with SDL, making it a cost-feasible alternative.
Authors: Eric B Schneider; Omar Hyder; Benjamin S Brooke; Jonathan Efron; John L Cameron; Barish H Edil; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Christopher L Wolfgang; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-01-29 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Joshua A Waters; Brian M Rapp; Michael J Guzman; Andrea L Jester; Don J Selzer; Bruce W Robb; Blake J Johansen; Ben M Tsai; Dipen C Maun; Virgilio V George Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 41.316