首页> 外文期刊>JPRAS Open >A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review
【24h】

A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review

机译:一项为期24个月的成本和结果分析,比较了传统的额眶前行改良和内窥镜带状颅骨切除术和成型头盔在单冠状颅突联合治疗中的应用:回顾性双机构回顾

获取原文
       

摘要

IntroductionEndoscopic strip craniectomy with helmeting (ESCH) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious alternative to fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) for selected children with craniosynostosis. In addition to clinical factors, there may be economic benefits from the use of ESCH instead of FOR.MethodsA retrospective review of 23 patients with nonsyndromic unicoronal craniosynostosis (UCS) treated with FOR was carried out at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for Children in London, UK. Secondary data were used for the ESCH cohort from a paper published by Jimenez and Barone (2013). Data were collected on surgical time, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, adverse event rates, reintervention rates, and overall costs. Costs were categorized and then assigned to the appropriate data sets.ResultsThe mean age of patients undergoing FOR (vs. ESCH) was 17.4 mo (vs. 3.1 mo) with a mean surgical time of 234?min (vs. 55?min), mean transfusion volume of 221.6?mL (vs. 80.0?mL), mean transfusion rate of 14/23 (vs. 2/115), and a total immediate overnight stay of 3.13 days (vs. 97% next-day discharge). The FOR group had a higher adverse event rate (5/23 vs. 4/115,p=<0.005) and a higher number requiring extraocular muscle surgery (4/23 vs. 7/109,p=0.16). There was a substantial difference in overall costs between the two groups. Total variance cost for the FOR group was £7436.5 vs. £4951.35, representing a cost difference of £2485.15 over the 24-month study period.ConclusionESCH, in comparison to FOR, appears as a more economical method in the management of USC patients, as well as having clinical benefits including reduced adverse event rate and improved ophthalmic outcomes.
机译:引言内镜带帽颅骨开颅手术(ESCH)是对于某些患有颅突狭窄的儿童的额眶改建(FOR)安全有效的替代方法。方法除了临床因素外,使用ESCH代替FOR还可能带来经济利益。英国伦敦。 Jimenez和Barone(2013)发表的论文将二手数据用于ESCH队列。收集了有关手术时间,输血率,住院时间,不良事件发生率,再干预率和总费用的数据。将费用分类,然后分配给适当的数据集。结果接受FOR的患者的平均年龄(vs. ESCH)为17.4 mo(vs.的3.1 mo),平均手术时间为234?min(vs. 55?min),平均输血量为221.6?mL(vs。80.0?mL),平均输血率为14/23(vs.2 / 115),总即时过夜时间为3.13天(vs.次日排出量为97%)。 FOR组不良事件发生率更高(5/23 vs. 4/115,p = <0.005),需要进行眼外肌手术的人数更高(4/23 vs. 7/109,p = 0.16)。两组之间的总体成本有很大差异。 FOR组的总差异成本为£ 7436.5与£ 4951.35,vs24个月研究期间的成本差为2485.15。结论ESCH与FOR相比,在USC患者管理中似乎是一种更为经济的方法,并具有临床益处,包括降低不良事件发生率和改善眼科预后。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
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