Literature DB >> 27815745

A new perspective on the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery-payer, provider, and patient benefits.

Deborah S Keller1, Anthony J Senagore2, Kathryn Fitch3, Andrew Bochner3, Eric M Haas4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are proven, but overall financial benefits are not fully explored. Our goal was to evaluate the financial benefits of MIS from the payer's perspective to demonstrate the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery.
METHODS: A Truven MarketScan® claim-based analysis identified all 2013 elective, inpatient colectomies. Cases were stratified into open or MIS approaches based on ICD-9 procedure codes; then costs were assessed using a similar distribution across diagnosis related groups (DRGs). Care episodes were compared for average allowed costs, complication, and readmission rates after adjusting costs for demographics, comorbidities, and geographic region.
RESULTS: A total of 4615 colectomies were included-2054 (44.5 %) open and 2561 (55.5 %) MIS. Total allowed episode costs were significantly lower MIS than open ($37,540 vs. $45,284, p < 0.001). During the inpatient stay, open cases had significantly greater ICU utilization (3.9 % open vs. 2.0 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher overall complications (52.8 % open vs. 32.3 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher colorectal-specific complications (32.5 % open vs. 17.9 % MIS, p < 0.001), longer LOS (6.39 open vs. 4.44 days MIS, p < 0.001), and higher index admission costs ($39,585 open vs. $33,183 MIS, p < 0.001). Post-discharge, open cases had significantly higher readmission rates/100 cases (11.54 vs. 8.28; p = 0.0013), higher average readmission costs ($3055 vs. $2,514; p = 0.1858), and greater 30-day healthcare costs than MIS ($5699 vs. $4357; p = 0.0033). The net episode cost of care was $7744/patient greater for an open colectomy, even with similar DRG distribution.
CONCLUSIONS: In a commercially insured population, the risk-adjusted allowed costs for MIS colectomy episodes were significantly lower than open. The overall cost difference between MIS and open was almost $8000 per patient. This highlights an opportunity for health plans and employers to realize financial benefits by shifting from open to MIS for colectomy. With increasing bundled payment arrangements and accountable care sharing programs, the cost impact of shifting from open to MIS introduces an opportunity for cost savings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost shifting; Financial benefits; Healthcare outcomes; Minimally invasive colorectal surgery; Open colorectal surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27815745     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5295-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  31 in total

1.  Case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcome after laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Conor P Delaney; Ravi P Kiran; Anthony J Senagore; Karen Brady; Victor W Fazio
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Large variations in Medicare payments for surgery highlight savings potential from bundled payment programs.

Authors:  David C Miller; Cathryn Gust; Justin B Dimick; Nancy Birkmeyer; Jonathan Skinner; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 6.301

3.  The impact of ineffective and inefficient care on the excess costs of elective surgical procedures.

Authors:  Donald E Fry; Michael Pine; Barbara L Jones; Roger J Meimban
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2011-03-12       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Who pays for poor surgical quality? Building a business case for quality improvement.

Authors:  Justin B Dimick; William B Weeks; Raj J Karia; Smita Das; Darrell A Campbell
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 6.113

5.  Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy).

Authors:  M Jacobs; J C Verdeja; H S Goldstein
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1991-09

6.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open left colonic resection.

Authors:  M Braga; M Frasson; W Zuliani; A Vignali; N Pecorelli; V Di Carlo
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Prioritizing quality improvement in general surgery.

Authors:  Peter L Schilling; Justin B Dimick; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2008-07-21       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Quality of life in the first 6 weeks following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Henry M Dowson; Karen Ballard; Heather Gage; Daniel Jackson; Peter Williams; Timothy A Rockall
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

9.  Outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2009.

Authors:  Celeste Y Kang; Obaid O Chaudhry; Wissam J Halabi; Vinh Nguyen; Joseph C Carmichael; Michael J Stamos; Steven Mills
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2012-11-01       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Variations in Laparoscopic Colectomy Utilization in the United States.

Authors:  Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh; Joseph C Carmichael; Steven Mills; Alessio Pigazzi; Ninh T Nguyen; Michael J Stamos
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.585

View more
  7 in total

1.  The cost of conversion in robotic and laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Robert K Cleary; Andrew J Mullard; Jane Ferraro; Scott E Regenbogen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Access to common laparoscopic general surgical procedures: do racial disparities exist?

Authors:  Kasey Leigh Wood; Syed F Haider; Anthony Bui; I Michael Leitman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Minimally invasive colectomy is associated with reduced risk of anastomotic leak and other major perioperative complications and reduced hospital resource utilization as compared with open surgery: a retrospective population-based study of comparative effectiveness and trends of surgical approach.

Authors:  David Wei; Stephen Johnston; Laura Goldstein; Deborah Nagle
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A National study on the adoption of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the elderly population: current state and value proposition.

Authors:  D S Keller; J Qiu; R P Kiran
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  Postoperative Use of Biologics was Less Common among Patients with Crohn's Disease With Emergent/Urgent Versus Elective Intestinal Resection.

Authors:  Joehl T Nguyen; Edward L Barnes; Carolyn T Thorpe; Karyn B Stitzenberg; Casey R Tak; Alan C Kinlaw
Journal:  Gastro Hep Adv       Date:  2022-06-13

6.  Financial burden of postoperative complications following colonic resection: A systematic review.

Authors:  Maleck Louis; Samuel A Johnston; Leonid Churilov; Ronald Ma; Christopher Christophi; Laurence Weinberg
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Demographics and Outcomes of Spine Surgery in Octogenarians and Nonagenarians: A Comparison of the National Inpatient Sample, MarketScan and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Databases.

Authors:  Siddharth Bhargava; Mayur Sharma; Nicholas Dietz; Joseph Dettori; Beatrice Ugiliweneza; Miriam Nuno; Maxwell Boakye; Doniel Drazin
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-11-19
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.