• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

非选择性冠状动脉搭桥手术的成本分析

A cost analysis of nonelective coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

作者信息

Violette Philippe D, Filion Kristian B, Haider Seema, Pilote Louise, Eisenberg Mark J

机构信息

Divisions of Cardiology and Clinical Epidemiology, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

J Card Surg. 2006 Nov-Dec;21(6):621-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2006.00315.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1540-8191.2006.00315.x
PMID:17073972
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Previous studies suggest that nonelective coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is more costly than elective CABG. The goal of this study was to examine why cost differences exist between patients undergoing nonelective and elective CABG.

METHODS

We compared the outcomes and costs of treating 1613 consecutive patients undergoing nonelective (N = 1071) and elective (N = 542) CABG at three U.S. hospitals. Participating centers each used the same cost accounting system to provide patient-level clinical and cost data. Total, direct, and overhead costs were examined as were department-level costs.

RESULTS

Compared to elective patients, nonelective patients were of similar age (66.4 years vs 67.0 years, respectively, p = NS), but were more likely to be female (32.7% vs 24.0%, p = 0.0003). Nonelective patients had longer lengths of stay (LOS) than elective patients (9.7 +/- 0.2 days vs 6.6 +/- 0.3 days, p < 0.0001). The longer LOS among nonelective patients was primarily due to a longer preoperative LOS (2.6 +/- 0.08 days vs 0.4 +/- 0.05 days). Unadjusted in-hospital costs of treatment were 38% higher among nonelective patients ($25,111 +/-$550 vs $18,445 +/-$752, p < 0.0001). After controlling for baseline demographic and clinical differences, the increase in cost among nonelective patients was reduced to 33% (cost ratio = 1.33, 95% confidence interval = 1.27 to 1.39, p < 0.0001). The difference in cost among nonelective patients was further reduced to 16% after controlling for rates of preoperative angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 14% after adjusting for the use of a pacemaker or a balloon pump, and 7% after adjusting for preoperative LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing nonelective CABG have longer LOS and higher costs than patients undergoing elective CABG. The increased cost among nonelective patients is largely due to differences in rates of preoperative LOS, angiography, and PCI. This differential reflects increased nonsurgical costs among patients undergoing nonelective CABG rather than surgical costs.

摘要

背景

先前的研究表明,非选择性冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)比选择性CABG成本更高。本研究的目的是探讨接受非选择性和选择性CABG的患者之间存在成本差异的原因。

方法

我们比较了美国三家医院连续接受非选择性(N = 1071)和选择性(N = 542)CABG的1613例患者的治疗结果和成本。参与研究的中心均使用相同的成本核算系统来提供患者层面的临床和成本数据。对总费用、直接费用和间接费用以及科室层面的费用进行了检查。

结果

与选择性手术患者相比,非选择性手术患者年龄相仿(分别为66.4岁和67.0岁,p =无统计学意义),但女性比例更高(32.7%对24.0%,p = 0.0003)。非选择性手术患者的住院时间(LOS)比选择性手术患者更长(9.7±0.2天对6.6±0.3天,p < 0.0001)。非选择性手术患者较长的住院时间主要是由于术前住院时间更长(2.6±0.08天对0.4±0.05天)。非选择性手术患者未经调整的住院治疗费用高出38%(25,111±550美元对18,445±752美元,p < 0.0001)。在控制了基线人口统计学和临床差异后,非选择性手术患者的成本增加降至33%(成本比 = 1.33,95%置信区间 = 1.27至1.39,p < 0.

相似文献

1
A cost analysis of nonelective coronary artery bypass graft surgery.非选择性冠状动脉搭桥手术的成本分析
J Card Surg. 2006 Nov-Dec;21(6):621-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2006.00315.x.
2
Outcomes and cost of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the United States and Canada.美国和加拿大冠状动脉搭桥手术的结果与成本。
Arch Intern Med. 2005 Jul 11;165(13):1506-13. doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.13.1506.
3
Coronary artery bypass graft surgery: do women cost more?冠状动脉搭桥手术:女性花费更多吗?
Can J Cardiol. 2005 Nov;21(13):1195-200.
4
Direct costs of coronary artery bypass grafting in patients aged 65 years or more and those under age 65.65岁及以上患者与65岁以下患者冠状动脉搭桥术的直接成本。
CMAJ. 1999 Mar 23;160(6):805-11.
5
Myocardial infarction following coronary artery bypass graft surgery increases healthcare resource utilization.冠状动脉搭桥手术后的心肌梗死会增加医疗资源的使用。
Crit Care Med. 2007 May;35(5):1296-301. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000262403.08546.A2.
6
Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary disease.多支冠状动脉疾病患者的冠状动脉搭桥手术与药物洗脱支架植入的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对比
J Interv Cardiol. 2007 Feb;20(1):10-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2007.00222.x.
7
Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians: clinical and economic outcomes at community-based healthcare facilities.八旬老人冠状动脉搭桥术:社区医疗机构的临床与经济结果
Am J Manag Care. 2002 Aug;8(8):749-55.
8
Elective percutaneous coronary intervention without on-site cardiac surgery: clinical and economic implications.无现场心脏手术的择期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:临床和经济影响
Med Care. 2006 May;44(5):406-13. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000207489.13557.cc.
9
Costs of payment in Thai acute coronary syndrome patients.泰国急性冠状动脉综合征患者的支付费用。
J Med Assoc Thai. 2007 Oct;90 Suppl 1:21-31.
10
Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafts versus percutaneous coronary intervention for revascularization of high-risk patients.冠状动脉搭桥术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗高危患者血运重建的成本效益分析
Circulation. 2006 Sep 19;114(12):1251-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.570838. Epub 2006 Sep 11.

引用本文的文献

1
CABG Improves Outcomes in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: 10-Year Follow-Up of the STICH Trial.CABG 改善缺血性心肌病患者的预后:随机对照 STICH 试验 10 年随访结果
JACC Heart Fail. 2019 Oct;7(10):878-887. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.04.018. Epub 2019 Sep 11.
2
The subsequent course of disability in older persons discharged to a skilled nursing facility after an acute hospitalization.老年人在急性住院后转入熟练护理机构后的后续残疾过程。
Exp Gerontol. 2017 Oct 15;97:73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2017.08.004. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
3
The use of the transition cost accounting system in health services research.
在卫生服务研究中使用过渡成本核算系统。
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2007 Aug 8;5:11. doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-5-11.