Alejandro Ruiz-Patiño1, Samuel Rey2, German Molina2, Luis Carlos Dominguez2, Saul Rugeles3. 1. Medicine Faculty, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogota, Colombia. Electronic address: Alejandro.ruiz.pat@gmail.com. 2. Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogota, Colombia. 3. Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogota, Colombia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colombia is a developing nation in need for efficient resource administration in fields such as health care, where innovation is constant. Since the introduction of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), direct costs have been increasing without definitive results in terms of clinical outcomes. The objective of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of open appendectomy (OA) versus LA and thereby help surgeons in clinical decision-making in a limited resource setting. METHODS: A retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis comparing OA versus multiport LA during 2013 in a third-level university hospital (Hospital Universitario San Ignacio) in Bogota, Colombia was performed. Effectiveness was determined as the number of days in additional length of stay (LOS) due to the complications saved. A total of 377 clinical histories were collected by the authors and analyzed for the following variables: surgery type, conversion to open laparotomy, complications (surgical site infection, reintervention, and readmission), hospital LOS, and total cost of hospitalization for initial surgery and subsequent complications-related hospitalizations. The total accumulative costs and LOS for OA and LA plus complications were estimated. The cost-effectiveness threshold was set at US $46 (139,000 Colombian Peso [COP]), the cost of an additional day in LOS. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for OA as the comparator and LA as the intervention. RESULTS: The number of LA was 130 and of OA was 247. The two groups were balanced in terms of population characteristics. Complication rate was 13.7 % for OA and 10.4% for LA (P < 0.05), and LOS was 2 days for LA and OA (P = 0.9). No conversions from LA to OA were recorded. The total costs for complications for OA were US $8523 (25,569,220 COP) and US 3385 (10,157,758 COP) for LA. Cumulative costs including cost of surgery and complications and LOS for OA were US $65,753 (197,259,310 COP) and 297, respectively. Similarly, for LA were US $66,425 (199,276,948 COP) and 271, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US $25.86 (77,601 COP) making LA a cost-effective alternative with a difference of US $20.76 (62,299 COP) under the cost-effectiveness threshold. CONCLUSIONS: LA is a cost-effective alternative over OA with an increasing cost of $25.85 per day of additional hospitalization due to complications saved. This is accounting the low cost of surgical interventions and complications in developing nations such as Colombia.
BACKGROUND: Colombia is a developing nation in need for efficient resource administration in fields such as health care, where innovation is constant. Since the introduction of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), direct costs have been increasing without definitive results in terms of clinical outcomes. The objective of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of open appendectomy (OA) versus LA and thereby help surgeons in clinical decision-making in a limited resource setting. METHODS: A retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis comparing OA versus multiport LA during 2013 in a third-level university hospital (Hospital Universitario San Ignacio) in Bogota, Colombia was performed. Effectiveness was determined as the number of days in additional length of stay (LOS) due to the complications saved. A total of 377 clinical histories were collected by the authors and analyzed for the following variables: surgery type, conversion to open laparotomy, complications (surgical site infection, reintervention, and readmission), hospital LOS, and total cost of hospitalization for initial surgery and subsequent complications-related hospitalizations. The total accumulative costs and LOS for OA and LA plus complications were estimated. The cost-effectiveness threshold was set at US $46 (139,000 Colombian Peso [COP]), the cost of an additional day in LOS. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for OA as the comparator and LA as the intervention. RESULTS: The number of LA was 130 and of OA was 247. The two groups were balanced in terms of population characteristics. Complication rate was 13.7 % for OA and 10.4% for LA (P < 0.05), and LOS was 2 days for LA and OA (P = 0.9). No conversions from LA to OA were recorded. The total costs for complications for OA were US $8523 (25,569,220 COP) and US 3385 (10,157,758 COP) for LA. Cumulative costs including cost of surgery and complications and LOS for OA were US $65,753 (197,259,310 COP) and 297, respectively. Similarly, for LA were US $66,425 (199,276,948 COP) and 271, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US $25.86 (77,601 COP) making LA a cost-effective alternative with a difference of US $20.76 (62,299 COP) under the cost-effectiveness threshold. CONCLUSIONS: LA is a cost-effective alternative over OA with an increasing cost of $25.85 per day of additional hospitalization due to complications saved. This is accounting the low cost of surgical interventions and complications in developing nations such as Colombia.