...
首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >Cost Comparison of Outpatient Versus Inpatient Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
【24h】

Cost Comparison of Outpatient Versus Inpatient Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

机译:门诊与住院单室膝关节置换术的费用比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background:Outpatient unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been shown to be safe and feasible when compared with inpatient surgery; however, no studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of performing outpatient versus inpatient UKA.Hypothesis:Significant cost savings can be achieved by transitioning UKAs from an inpatient to an outpatient procedure in an outpatient surgical facility, with no appreciable difference in complication or readmission rates.Study Design:Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:A retrospective chart review of 25 consecutive medial UKAs was performed. A total of 10 inpatient UKAs with a mean length of stay of 1.6 days (range, 1-4 days) and 12 outpatient UKAs were included in the final analysis. A simple difference in costs incurred, reimbursements, and percentage difference between inpatient and outpatient surgery in an outpatient surgical facility was calculated. Charges were subdivided into surgical facility fees, inpatient room charges, operating room supply fees, and other fees. Secondary outcome measures included reason for greater than 1 day stay for the inpatient UKAs, complications, readmissions, and the type of regional anesthesia utilized.Results:The outpatient UKA charges were a mean $20,500 less per patient than the inpatient average charge of $46,845. The primary cost savings were attributed to the outpatient surgical facility fee, which averaged $3800 per patient, while the inpatient facility charge was 350% more expensive at $13,200 per patient (approximately $9500 savings). On the inpatient side, the average reimbursement was 55% of charges, or $25,550. For outpatient procedures, the average reimbursement was 47%, or $12,370. There was no difference between the inpatient and outpatient groups in terms of complications or readmissions.Conclusion:This work demonstrated that significant cost savings of roughly 50% can be achieved with an outpatient UKA protocol done at an outpatient surgical facility. Not only is it feasible and economically attractive to perform outpatient UKA, but it can reduce inpatient bed occupancy and resource allocation for a busy hospital.
机译:背景:门诊单室膝关节置换术(UKA)与住院手术相比已被证明是安全可行的。但是,尚无研究评估门诊和住院UKA的成本效益和成本效益。研究设计:经济和决策分析;证据级别,3。方法:对25个连续的内侧UKA进行回顾性图表审查。最终分析共包括10个住院UKA,平均住院天数为1.6天(范围为1-4天)和12个门诊UKA。计算出门诊手术设施中住院和门诊手术的费用,报销额和百分比差异的简单差异。费用分为手术设施费,住院费,手术室供应费和其他费用。次要结果指标包括住院UKA停留时间超过1天的原因,并发症,再入院率以及使用的区域麻醉类型。结果:门诊UKA的平均费用比住院平均费用46,845美元少20,500美元。主要的成本节省归因于门诊手术设施费,平均每位患者3800美元,而住院设施费用贵了350%,每位患者13200美元(节省了大约9500美元)。在住院方面,平均费用为收费的55%,即25,550美元。门诊手术的平均报销额为47%,即$ 12,370。住院和门诊患者在并发症或再入院方面没有差异。结论:这项工作表明,在门诊外科设施进行门诊UKA协议可以节省大约50%的成本。进行门诊UKA不仅可行而且在经济上有吸引力,而且可以减少繁忙医院的住院床位和资源分配。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号