Literature DB >> 29124365

Change in reimbursement and costs in German oncological head and neck surgery over the last decade: ablative tongue cancer surgery and reconstruction with split-thickness skin graft vs. microvascular radial forearm flap.

Sebastian Hoefert1, Oliver Lotter2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Defects after ablative tongue cancer surgery can be reconstructed by split-thickness skin grafts or free microvascular flaps. The different surgical options may influence costs, reimbursement, and therefore possible profits. Our goal was to analyze the development of these parameters for different procedures in head and neck reconstruction in Germany over the last decade.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: After tumor resection and neck dissection of tongue cancer, three different scenarios were chosen to calculate costs, reimbursement, length of stay (LoS), and profits. Two options considered were reconstruction by split-thickness skin graft with (option Ia) and without (option Ib) tracheotomy. In addition, we analyzed microvascular reconstruction with radial forearm flap (option II). Furthermore, unsatisfactory results after options Ia and Ib may make secondary tongue plastic with split-thickness skin grafting necessary (option I+). The calculations were performed considering the German Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) system and compared to the specific DRG cost data of 250 German reference hospitals.
RESULTS: The overall average length of stay (aLoS) declined from 16.7 to 12.8 days with a reduction in every option. Until 2011, all options showed similar accumulated DRG reimbursement. From 2012 onwards, earnings almost doubled for option II due to changes in the DRG allocation. As was expected, the highest costs were observed in option II. Profits (reimbursement minus costs) were also highest for option II (mean 2052 €, maximum 3630 Euros in 2015) followed by options Ia (765 €) and Ib/I+ (681 €). Average profits over time would be 17 to 19% higher if adjusted for inflation.
CONCLUSIONS: We showed the development of the DRG allocation of two commonly used methods of reconstruction after ablative tongue cancer surgery and the associated LoS, reimbursement, costs, and profits. As expected, the highest values were found for microvascular reconstruction. Microvascular reconstruction may also be the primary choice of treatment from a medical point of view. However, prolonged operation times, intensive care, and hospital stay in connection with complex microvascular operations can easily turn profits into losses as opposed to the results of simple, reliable, and fast split-thickness skin grafting. The inflation rate influences profits in reimbursement systems where costs are based on a previous period of time. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Surgeons find themselves daily in an area of conflict between economic interests and medical decision-making. Due to its multidimensional aspects, the choice of the reconstructive technique should be primarily based on the best medical care for the patient. But there should also be awareness of the economic risk of all three surgical procedures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Costs; Diagnosis Related Groups; Head and neck reconstruction; Radial forearm flap; Reimbursement; Split-thickness skin graft

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29124365     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-017-2269-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  29 in total

1.  Contemporary assessment of medical morbidity and mortality in head and neck surgery.

Authors:  Harrison W Lin; Neil Bhattacharyya
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 3.497

2.  Length of stay after free flap reconstruction of the head and neck.

Authors:  M W Ryan; M Hochman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  A comparison of resource costs for head and neck reconstruction with free and pectoralis major flaps.

Authors:  S S Kroll; G R Evans; D Goldberg; B G Wang; G P Reece; M J Miller; G L Robb; B J Baldwin; M A Schusterman
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  [Renaissance of pedicled flaps in oral and maxillofacial surgery].

Authors:  M Twieg; W Reich; R Dempf; A W Eckert
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Measures of health-related quality of life and functional status in survivors of oral cavity cancer who have had defects reconstructed with radial forearm free flaps.

Authors:  G I Smith; D Yeo; J Clark; E T Choy; K Gao; J Oates; C J O'Brien
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 1.651

6.  Reconstruction of the oral cavity with a free flap.

Authors:  W R Panje; J Bardach; C J Krause
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Skin grafts and flaps in oral cavity reconstruction.

Authors:  V L Schramm; J T Johnson; E N Myers
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol       Date:  1983-03

8.  Comparison of cost and function in reconstruction of the posterior oral cavity and oropharynx. Free vs pedicled soft tissue transfer.

Authors:  T T Tsue; S S Desyatnikova; F W Deleyiannis; N D Futran; B C Stack; E A Weymuller; M G Glenn
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1997-07

9.  A comparison of three methods of oral reconstruction.

Authors:  F M McConnel; J F Teichgraeber; R K Adler
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1987-05

10.  Long-term functional outcome and satisfaction after radial forearm free flap reconstructions of intraoral malignancy resections.

Authors:  R Rhemrev; H A Rakhorst; J M Zuidam; M A M Mureau; S E R Hovius; S O P Hofer
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2007-02-21       Impact factor: 2.740

View more
  2 in total

1.  Misvaluation of Hospital-Based Upper Extremity Surgery Across Payment, Relative Value Units, and Operative Time.

Authors:  Suresh K Nayar; Keith T Aziz; Ryan M Zimmerman; Umasuthan Srikumaran; Dawn M LaPorte; Aviram M Giladi
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2020

2.  Oral recipient site infections in reconstructive surgery - impact of the graft itself and the perioperative antibiosis.

Authors:  Matthias Zirk; Artjom Zalesski; Franziska Peters; Matthias Kreppel; Max Zinser; Joachim E Zöller
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 3.573

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.