Suppr超能文献

腹主动脉瘤血管内修复术和开放修复术的住院费用。

Hospital costs for endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

作者信息

Dryjski Maciej, O'Brien-Irr Monica S, Hassett James

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Kaleida Health, Millard Fillmore Hospital, 14209, USA.

出版信息

J Am Coll Surg. 2003 Jul;197(1):64-70. doi: 10.1016/S1072-7515(03)00341-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To evaluate hospital costs and reimbursement for open (OAAA) and endovascular (EVAAA) repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

STUDY DESIGN

Review of all patients who underwent OAAA or EVAAA in two teaching hospitals during the period January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2000, was completed for the following: demographics, Diagnosis Related Group (DRG), resource use, length of stay, hospital costs, and reimbursement data.

RESULTS

There were 130 abdominal aortic aneurysm procedures performed. Fifty-seven (44%) OAAA were completed; EVAAA was attempted in 73 (56%). Seventy EVAAA patients (96%) had endografts placed, and three (4%) required conversion to open repair. Significant differences were noted between OAAA and EVAAA in operative time (311.7 +/- 107.5 minutes versus 263.4 +/- 110.8 minutes, respectively, p = 0.02), ICU admission and length of stay (100%, 5.0 +/- 6.1 days versus 29%, 1.4 +/- 7.1 days, respectively, p = 0.003), and hospital length of stay (12.6 +/- 14.8 days versus 4.9 +/- 13.4 days, respectively, p = 0.002). Total costs were $17,539.00 for EVAAA and $9,042.00 for OAAA. EVAAA was profitable ($3,072.00) for Medicare DRG 110 classification, but significant loss occurred with DRG 111 ($5,065.00). Contract renegotiation with private payers (to cover graft costs) was necessary to avoid substantial per- patient loss ($12,108.00). Overall net per-patient profit for EVAAA was $737.00.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is significantly more expensive than open repair, with the major portion attributed to graft cost. Although ICU use and total length of stay decreased with EVAAA, overall costs were not substantially reduced. Hospitals must develop new financial strategies and improve the efficiency of their infrastructures in order to offer EVAAA.

摘要

背景

评估腹主动脉瘤开放修复术(OAAA)和血管腔内修复术(EVAAA)的医院成本及报销情况。

研究设计

对2000年1月1日至2000年12月31日期间在两家教学医院接受OAAA或EVAAA手术的所有患者进行回顾,内容包括:人口统计学资料、诊断相关分组(DRG)、资源使用情况、住院时间、医院成本及报销数据。

结果

共进行了130例腹主动脉瘤手术。完成57例(44%)OAAA;尝试进行73例(56%)EVAAA。70例(96%)EVAAA患者植入了血管内移植物,3例(4%)需要转为开放修复。OAAA和EVAAA在手术时间(分别为311.7±107.5分钟和263.4±110.8分钟,p = 0.02)、入住重症监护病房(ICU)情况及住院时间(分别为100%、5.0±6.1天和29%、1.4±7.1天,p = 0.003)、以及总住院时间(分别为12.6±14.8天和4.9±13.4天,p = 0.002)方面存在显著差异。EVAAA的总成本为17,539.00美元,OAAA为9,042.00美元。对于医疗保险DRG 110分类,EVAAA有盈利(3,072.00美元),但DRG 111出现了显著亏损(5,065.00美元)。需要与私人支付方重新协商合同(以支付移植物费用)以避免每位患者出现重大亏损(12,108.00美元)。EVAAA每位患者的总体净利润为737.00美元。

结论

血管腔内腹主动脉瘤修复术比开放修复术成本显著更高,主要部分归因于移植物成本。尽管EVAAA减少了ICU使用和总住院时间,但总体成本并未大幅降低。医院必须制定新的财务策略并提高其基础设施效率,以便能够开展EVAAA。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验