Background: Robotic surgery has many clinical advantages but high costs, raising the issue of healthcare sustainability. This study aims to a comparative analysis of the value, in terms of costs and outcomes, of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery for uterine cancer in a University Hospital. Methods: An observational retrospective study was carried out on hospitalizations between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Oct 2021 for uterine cancer surgery. DRG amount, costs, economic margins and 30-days readmissions percentage (mean values and 95% CIs) were calculated for robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgery. Student’s t and Chi-square tests were used to assess differences and the break-even point was calculated. Results: 1336 hospitalizations were analyzed, 366 with robotic, 591 with laparoscopic, and 379 with laparotomy surgery. Robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and laparotomy showed a significant difference (p<0,001) for economic margin, which was largely negative (-1069.18 E; 95%CI: -1240.44 - -897.92 E) mainly due to devices cost (3549.37 E; 95%CI: 3459.32 E - 3639.43 E), and a lower 30-days readmissions percentage (1.4%; 95%CI: 0.2% - 2.6%) with a significant difference only versus laparotomy (p = 0.029). Laparoscopic compared to laparotomy surgery showed a significantly (p<0,001) more profitable economic margin (1692.21 E; 95%CI: 1531.75 E - 1852.66 E) without a significant difference for 30-days readmissions. The break-even analysis showed that, on average, for every uterine cancer laparoscopic elective surgery, 1.58 elective robotic surgeries are sustainable for the hospital (95% CI: 1.23 - 2.06). Conclusions: The systematic application of the break-even analysis will allow defining over time the right distribution of robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgeries’ volumes to perform in order to ensure both quality and economic-financial balance and therefore value of uterine oncological surgery in the University Hospital. Key messages: The value-based healthcare approach, defined as the measured improvement in a patient’s health outcomes in relation to its cost, finds effective application in uterine cancer surgery. The use of the break-even approach allows to promote the value-based view by identifying a useful criterion for the planning and governance of interventions for uterine malignancies.

Specchia, M. L., Arcuri, G., Di Pilla, A., La Gatta, E., Osti, T., Limongelli, P. E., Scambia, G., Bellantone, R. D. A., The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis, Abstract de <<15th European Public Health Conference “Strengthening health systems: improving population health and being prepared for the unexpected”>>, (Berlin, 09-November 12-October 2022 ), <<EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH>>, 2022; (Vol 32, Suppl 3): iii527-iii527 [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/262457]

The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis

Specchia, Maria Lucia;Arcuri, Giovanni;Osti, Tommaso;Limongelli, Paola Enrica;Scambia, Giovanni;Bellantone, Rocco Domenico Alfonso
2022

Abstract

Background: Robotic surgery has many clinical advantages but high costs, raising the issue of healthcare sustainability. This study aims to a comparative analysis of the value, in terms of costs and outcomes, of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery for uterine cancer in a University Hospital. Methods: An observational retrospective study was carried out on hospitalizations between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Oct 2021 for uterine cancer surgery. DRG amount, costs, economic margins and 30-days readmissions percentage (mean values and 95% CIs) were calculated for robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgery. Student’s t and Chi-square tests were used to assess differences and the break-even point was calculated. Results: 1336 hospitalizations were analyzed, 366 with robotic, 591 with laparoscopic, and 379 with laparotomy surgery. Robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and laparotomy showed a significant difference (p<0,001) for economic margin, which was largely negative (-1069.18 E; 95%CI: -1240.44 - -897.92 E) mainly due to devices cost (3549.37 E; 95%CI: 3459.32 E - 3639.43 E), and a lower 30-days readmissions percentage (1.4%; 95%CI: 0.2% - 2.6%) with a significant difference only versus laparotomy (p = 0.029). Laparoscopic compared to laparotomy surgery showed a significantly (p<0,001) more profitable economic margin (1692.21 E; 95%CI: 1531.75 E - 1852.66 E) without a significant difference for 30-days readmissions. The break-even analysis showed that, on average, for every uterine cancer laparoscopic elective surgery, 1.58 elective robotic surgeries are sustainable for the hospital (95% CI: 1.23 - 2.06). Conclusions: The systematic application of the break-even analysis will allow defining over time the right distribution of robotic, laparoscopic and laparotomy surgeries’ volumes to perform in order to ensure both quality and economic-financial balance and therefore value of uterine oncological surgery in the University Hospital. Key messages: The value-based healthcare approach, defined as the measured improvement in a patient’s health outcomes in relation to its cost, finds effective application in uterine cancer surgery. The use of the break-even approach allows to promote the value-based view by identifying a useful criterion for the planning and governance of interventions for uterine malignancies.
2022
Inglese
Specchia, M. L., Arcuri, G., Di Pilla, A., La Gatta, E., Osti, T., Limongelli, P. E., Scambia, G., Bellantone, R. D. A., The value of uterine oncological surgery in a University Hospital. Results of a break-even analysis, Abstract de <<15th European Public Health Conference “Strengthening health systems: improving population health and being prepared for the unexpected”>>, (Berlin, 09-November 12-October 2022 ), <<EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH>>, 2022; (Vol 32, Suppl 3): iii527-iii527 [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/262457]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/262457
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact