Literature DB >> 24513969

A comparison of quality outcome measures in patients having a hysterectomy for benign disease: robotic vs. non-robotic approaches.

Martin A Martino1, Elizabeth A Berger2, Jeffrey T McFetridge3, Jocelyn Shubella4, Gabrielle Gosciniak5, Taylor Wejkszner6, Gregory F Kainz2, Jeremy Patriarco4, M Bijoy Thomas4, Richard Boulay4.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To measure procedure-related hospital readmissions within 30 days after discharge for patients who have a hysterectomy for benign disease. Secondary outcome quality measures evaluated were cost, estimated blood loss, length of stay and sum of costs associated with readmissions.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: Academic community hospital. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent hysterectomy to treat benign disease from January 2008 to December 2012.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were grouped according to route of hysterectomy: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (robotic), laparoscopic hysterectomy (laparoscopic), abdominal hysterectomy (open via laparotomy), and vaginal hysterectomy (vaginal).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 2554 patients: 601 in the robotic group, 427 in the laparoscopic group, 1194 in the abdominal group, and 332 in the vaginal group. Readmission rates in the robotic cohort were significantly less (p<.05) than in non-robotic cohorts: Robotic (1%), laparoscopic (2.5%), open (3.5%), vaginal (2.4%). Estimated blood loss, length of stay, and sum of readmission costs were also significantly less in the robotic cohort (p<.05) compared with the other 3 cohorts.
CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy have a significantly lower chance of readmission <30 days after surgery compared with those who undergo laparoscopic, abdominal (open) hysterectomy, and vaginal approaches. Patients in the robotics cohort also experienced a shorter length of stay, less estimated blood loss, and a cost savings associated with readmissions when compared to non-robotic approaches. Prospective registries describing quality outcomes, total sum of costs including 30 days follow-up, as well as patient-related quality of life benefits are recommended to confirm these findings and determine which surgical route offers the highest patient and societal value.
Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Benign gynecologic surgery; Hysterectomy; Readmission; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24513969     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.10.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  14 in total

Review 1.  Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Authors:  Benjamin B Albright; Tilman Witte; Alena N Tofte; Jeremy Chou; Jonathan D Black; Vrunda B Desai; Elisabeth A Erekson
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 4.137

2.  Can a virtual reality surgical simulation training provide a self-driven and mentor-free skills learning? Investigation of the practical influence of the performance metrics from the virtual reality robotic surgery simulator on the skill learning and associated cognitive workloads.

Authors:  Gyusung I Lee; Mija R Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Comparison of cost and operative outcomes of robotic hysterectomy compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy across different uterine weights.

Authors:  Gaby N Moawad; Elias D Abi Khalil; Paul Tyan; Michael K Shu; David Samuel; Richard Amdur; Stacey A Scheib; Cherie Q Marfori
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-01-31

4.  Surgeons' physical discomfort and symptoms during robotic surgery: a comprehensive ergonomic survey study.

Authors:  G I Lee; M R Lee; I Green; M Allaf; M R Marohn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Health resource utilization and costs during the first 90 days following robot-assisted hysterectomy.

Authors:  Vani Dandolu; Prathamesh Pathak
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Health care cost consequences of using robot technology for hysterectomy: a register-based study of consecutive patients during 2006-2013.

Authors:  Karin Rosenkilde Laursen; Vibe Bolvig Hyldgård; Pernille Tine Jensen; Rikke Søgaard
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-07-10

7.  Less is more: clinical impact of decreasing pneumoperitoneum pressures during robotic surgery.

Authors:  Christine E Foley; Erika Ryan; Jian Qun Huang
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-06-22

8.  Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Authors:  Marc L Winter; Szu-Yun Leu; David C Lagrew; Gerardo Bustillo
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2015-07-30

9.  Single-site robotic surgery in gynecologic cancer: a pilot study.

Authors:  Ha Na Yoo; Tae Joong Kim; Yoo Young Lee; Chel Hun Choi; Jeong Won Lee; Duk Soo Bae; Byoung Gie Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.401

Review 10.  Robotic surgery in gynecology.

Authors:  Rooma Sinha; Madhumati Sanjay; B Rupa; Samita Kumari
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.407

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.