Literature DB >> 31139991

Outcomes and impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair versus open inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and employee absenteeism.

Gurteshwar Rana1, Priscila Rodrigues Armijo2, Shariq Khan2, Nathan Bills2, Marsha Morien2, Jianying Zhang3, Dmitry Oleynikov4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study compares the impact of open (OIHR) versus laparoscopic (LIHR) inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and postoperative outcomes.
METHODS: The TRUVEN database was queried using ICD9 procedure codes for open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted IHR, from 2012 to 2013. Patients > 18 years of age and continuously enrolled for 12 months postoperatively were included. Demographics, patient comorbidities, postoperative complications, pain medication use, length of hospital stay, missed work hours, postoperative visits, and overall expenditure were collected, and assessed at time of surgery and at 30-, 60-, 90-, 180-, and 365-days postoperatively. Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS, with α = 0.05.
RESULTS: 66,116 patients were included (LIHR: N = 23,010; OIHR: N = 43,106). Robotic-assisted procedures were excluded due to small sample size (N = 61). The largest demographic was males between 55 and 64 years. LIHR had fewer surgical wound complications than OIHR (LIHR: 0.3%; OIHR: 0.5%, p = 0.007), less utilization of pain medication (LIHR: 23.3%; OIHR: 28.5%; p < 0.001), and fewer outpatient visits. In the 90-day postoperative period, LIHR had significantly fewer missed work hours (LIHR: 12.1 ± 23.2 h; OIHR: 12.9 ± 26.7 h, p = 0.023). LIHR had higher postoperative urinary complications (LIHR: 0.2%; OIHR: 0.1%; p < 0.001), consistent with the current literature. LIHR expenditures ($15,030 ± $25,906) were higher than OIHR ($13,303 ± 32,014), p < 0.001.
CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the benefits of laparoscopic repair with regard to surgical wound complications, postoperative pain, outpatient visits, and missed work hours. These improved outcomes with respect to overall healthcare spending and employee absenteeism support the paradigm shift toward laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs, in spite of higher overall expenditures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost analysis; Healthcare costs; Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair; Open inguinal hernia repair; Postoperative outcomes

Year:  2019        PMID: 31139991     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06835-6

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


  9 in total

1.  Patient-perspective quality of life after laparoscopic and open hernia repair: a controlled randomized trial.

Authors:  Ashraf E Abbas; Mohamed E Abd Ellatif; Nashat Noaman; Ahmad Negm; Gamal El-Morsy; Mahmoud Amin; Ahmad Moatamed
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Cost-effectiveness of extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized comparison with conventional herniorrhaphy. Coala trial group.

Authors:  M S Liem; J A Halsema; Y van der Graaf; A J Schrijvers; T J van Vroonhoven
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Perioperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  C Tadaki; D Lomelin; A Simorov; R Jones; M Humphreys; M daSilva; S Choudhury; V Shostrom; E Boilesen; V Kothari; D Oleynikov; M Goede
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 4.  Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair.

Authors:  K McCormack; N W Scott; P M Go; S Ross; A M Grant
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2003

5.  Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia.

Authors:  Leigh Neumayer; Anita Giobbie-Hurder; Olga Jonasson; Robert Fitzgibbons; Dorothy Dunlop; James Gibbs; Domenic Reda; William Henderson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-04-25       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 6.  A review of chronic pain after inguinal herniorrhaphy.

Authors:  Amudha S Poobalan; Julie Bruce; W Cairns S Smith; Peter M King; Zygmunt H Krukowski; W Alastair Chambers
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.442

7.  Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for inguinal hernia: outcome and cost.

Authors:  J Wellwood; M J Sculpher; D Stoker; G J Nicholls; C Geddes; A Whitehead; R Singh; D Spiegelhalter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-07-11

8.  Management of groin hernias by laparoscopy.

Authors:  R Ger; A Mishrick; J Hurwitz; C Romero; R Oddsen
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1993 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of Shouldice, Lichtenstein and transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repairs.

Authors:  M Butters; J Redecke; J Köninger
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 6.939

  9 in total
  4 in total

1.  Does adoption of new technology increase surgical volume? The robotic inguinal hernia repair model.

Authors:  Tara M Barry; Haroon Janjua; Christopher DuCoin; Emanuel Eguia; Paul C Kuo
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-09-13

2.  Clinical Data Analysis for Treatment of Adult Inguinal Hernia by TAPP or TEP.

Authors:  Chunhui Cao; Xiaoyu Shi; Wei Jin; Fengming Luan
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-05-20

3.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of mesh fixation techniques for laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia surgeries.

Authors:  Suphakarn Techapongsatorn; Amarit Tansawet; Oraluck Pattanaprateep; John Attia; Gareth J Mckay; Ammarin Thakkinstian
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-09-06       Impact factor: 2.908

Review 4.  Fascinating history of groin hernias: Comprehensive recognition of anatomy, classic considerations for herniorrhaphy, and current controversies in hernioplasty.

Authors:  Tomohide Hori; Daiki Yasukawa
Journal:  World J Methodol       Date:  2021-07-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.