...
首页> 外文期刊>Urology >Single institutional cost analysis of 325 robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies
【24h】

Single institutional cost analysis of 325 robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies

机译:325个机器人,腹腔镜和开放式部分肾切除术的单一机构成本分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: To compare costs associated with partial nephrectomy (PN) using robotic, laparoscopic (LPN), and open (OPN) approaches. Methods: An Investigational Review Board-approved prospectively maintained database was reviewed for 325 patients who underwent PN at our institution from January 2009 to December 2010. Costs for each surgical technique were itemized, including hospitalization, operating room (OR), anesthesia, medication, laboratory and pathology, professional fees, and blood bank. Continuous variables were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests, and categoric variables were analyzed with ??2 and Fisher exact tests. Results: Median costs of RPN were higher than LPN ($632, P =.005), but not significantly higher than OPN ($313, P =.14). The major cause of this difference was OR instrumentation and supplies. OR costs for LPN and OPN were equivalent (P =.11). The cost associated with anesthesia was significantly lower for RPN and LPN than for OPN (P =.002). RPN and LPN had lower hospitalization costs than OPN (P .0001), which was largely due to the shorter hospital stay (P .0001) and lower laboratory cost (P .0001). Pharmacy costs and blood bank costs were not significantly different among groups (P =.09 and P =.48, respectively). Conclusion: RPN had higher operating room costs than LPN and OPN, primarily due to instrumentation and supplies. This higher cost was offset by decreased cost of hospitalization in compared with the OPN group. Modification of practices aimed at lowering RPN instrumentation and supply costs may enable cost equivalence. ? 2013 Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.
机译:目的:比较机器人,腹腔镜(LPN)和开放式(OPN)方法与部分肾切除术(PN)相关的费用。方法:回顾性调查委员会批准的前瞻性维护数据库,该数据库涵盖了我们机构从2009年1月至2010年12月接受PN的325例患者。每种手术技术的费用逐项列出,包括住院,手术室(OR),麻醉,药物,实验室和病理学,专业费用和血库。连续变量用Kruskal-Wallis和Wilcoxon检验分析,分类变量用?? 2和Fisher精确检验分析。结果:RPN的中位数费用高于LPN(632美元,P = .005),但不显着高于OPN(313美元,P = .14)。造成这种差异的主要原因是OR仪器和耗材。 LPN和OPN的OR成本相等(P = .11)。 RPN和LPN的麻醉相关费用显着低于OPN(P = .002)。 RPN和LPN的住院费用低于OPN(P <.0001),这主要是由于住院时间较短(P <.0001)和实验室费用较低(P <.0001)。各组间的药房成本和血库成本没有显着差异(分别为P = .09和P = .48)。结论:RPN的手术室成本高于LPN和OPN,这主要是由于仪器和耗材。与OPN组相比,较高的费用被住院费用的减少所抵消。修改旨在降低RPN仪器和供应成本的做法可以实现成本等价。 ? 2013 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

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