Comparison of open versus bedside percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in the cardiothoracic surgical patient: outcomes and financial analysis.

BACKGROUND

The clinical and financial outcomes of a change in practice from traditional tracheostomy (open) to bedside percutaneous dilatational tracheostomies (PDT) was evaluated in patients who underwent cardiothoracic surgery.

METHODS

During 3 years, 86 tracheostomies were performed in more than 4,000 patients who underwent cardiac surgery, 59 open and 27 PDT. A retrospective analysis was performed comparing clinical and financial outcomes of the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics, medical histories, operations, or complications between open and PDT except the open group experienced more postoperative arrhythmias (70% [41 of 59] versus 44% [12 of 27], p < 0.05). Total savings associated with 1 year of PDT was $84,000, for a projected discounted savings of $283,000 during the study period. A sensitivity analysis of critical economic variables (number of tracheostomies per year, cost of operating room per minute, cost of intensive care unit bed per day) was included to evaluate the impact on cost savings. The net present value analysis, which discounts future savings by an appropriate interest rate, yielded a range of projected savings of PDT more than 5 years of $73,000 to $541,000 with a best estimate of $304,000 using figures established from our 3-year experience with PDT. Sensitivity analysis of the net present value for each critical variable was $227,000 per day of reduced intensive care unit length of stay, $180,000 per cost of operating room avoidance, $100,000 per intensive care unit bed cost per day, and $11,000 per additional tracheostomy per year.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant clinical differences between open and PDT in cardiac surgery patients during the 3-year study period; however, PDT offered significant cost savings.