Kathryn Chomsky-Higgins1, James G Kahn2. 1. Endocrine Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; San Francisco East Bay General Surgery, University of California, Oakland, California. Electronic address: Kate.chomsky-higgins@ucsf.edu. 2. Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI), particularly in colorectal surgery, continues to cause substantial morbidity and cost. Both process- and product-based interventions have been proposed and implemented. No cost-effectiveness analysis of such interventions has been published. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies for the prevention of SSI. Costs, utilities, and transition probabilities were obtained from literature review. We used a lifetime time horizon, captured with explicit event modeling for a year plus quantification of enduring health outcomes. We represented costs in 2017 US dollars and health effects in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Both process- and device-based strategies were dominant-clinically superior and also less expensive-compared with no intervention. Two types of double-ring wound protection barrier devices with greater anticontamination functionality were found to be both clinically superior and cost-saving compared with bundled process measures and simpler single-ring devices. Gains in QALYs were 230 per 1000 patients, and cost savings were 2.2 million dollars per 1000 patients, driven primarily by the high cost of SSI. CONCLUSIONS: We found process-based interventions and wound protection devices to be superior to no intervention in the prevention of SSI. Double ring devices offered a distinct advantage over simpler devices, with small reductions in SSI risk leading to substantial cost savings. Further innovation in device-based wound protection devices may offer increased prevention of SSI at acceptable cost-effectiveness levels.
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI), particularly in colorectal surgery, continues to cause substantial morbidity and cost. Both process- and product-based interventions have been proposed and implemented. No cost-effectiveness analysis of such interventions has been published. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies for the prevention of SSI. Costs, utilities, and transition probabilities were obtained from literature review. We used a lifetime time horizon, captured with explicit event modeling for a year plus quantification of enduring health outcomes. We represented costs in 2017 US dollars and health effects in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Both process- and device-based strategies were dominant-clinically superior and also less expensive-compared with no intervention. Two types of double-ring wound protection barrier devices with greater anticontamination functionality were found to be both clinically superior and cost-saving compared with bundled process measures and simpler single-ring devices. Gains in QALYs were 230 per 1000 patients, and cost savings were 2.2 million dollars per 1000 patients, driven primarily by the high cost of SSI. CONCLUSIONS: We found process-based interventions and wound protection devices to be superior to no intervention in the prevention of SSI. Double ring devices offered a distinct advantage over simpler devices, with small reductions in SSI risk leading to substantial cost savings. Further innovation in device-based wound protection devices may offer increased prevention of SSI at acceptable cost-effectiveness levels.
Authors: Juliane Friedrichs; Svenja Seide; Johannes Vey; Samuel Zimmermann; Julia Hardt; Jorg Kleeff; Johannes Klose; Christoph W Michalski; Meinhard Kieser; Maximilian Pilz; Ulrich Ronellenfitsch Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-11-25 Impact factor: 2.692