Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Eur Urol. 2013 Jul;64(1):11-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.012. Epub 2012 Aug 20.
With health technology innovation responsible for higher health care costs, it is essential to have accurate estimates regarding the differential costs between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP).
To describe the total hospitalization costs attributable to robotic and open surgery for radical prostatectomy (RP).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a population-based cohort by merging the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the American Hospital Association (AHA) survey from 2006 to 2008, we identified 29 837 prostate cancer patients who underwent RP.
ORP and RARP.
The primary outcome was total hospitalization costs adjusted to year 2008 US dollars. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify patient and hospital characteristics associated with total hospitalization costs and to estimate costs of ORP and RARP adjusted for case mix and hospital teaching status, location, and annual case volume.
Overall, 20 424 (68.5%) patients were surgically treated with RARP, and 9413 (31.5%) patients underwent ORP. Compared to ORP, patients undergoing RARP had shorter median length of stay (1 d vs 2 d; p<0.001) and were less likely to experience any postoperative complications (8.2% vs 11.3%; p<0.001). However, patients undergoing RARP had higher median hospitalization costs ($10409 vs $8862; p<0.001). After adjusting for patient and hospital features, RARP was associated with higher total hospitalization costs compared to ORP ($11932 vs $9390; p<0.001). Our results are limited by a study design using retrospective population-based data.
Despite RARP having lower complications and shorter length of stay than ORP, total hospitalization costs are higher for patients treated with RARP compared with those treated with ORP.
由于医疗技术创新导致医疗保健费用增加,因此准确估计机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)和开放性根治性前列腺切除术(ORP)之间的差异成本至关重要。
描述机器人和开放性前列腺切除术(RP)的总住院费用。
设计、地点和参与者:使用合并了 2006 年至 2008 年全国住院患者样本(NIS)和美国医院协会(AHA)调查的基于人群的队列,我们确定了 29837 名接受 RP 的前列腺癌患者。
ORP 和 RARP。
总体而言,20424 名(68.5%)患者接受了 RARP 手术治疗,9413 名(31.5%)患者接受了 ORP 手术治疗。与 ORP 相比,接受 RARP 的患者中位住院时间更短(1 天与 2 天;p<0.001),且术后并发症发生率更低(8.2%与 11.3%;p<0.001)。然而,接受 RARP 的患者的中位住院费用更高($10409 与 $8862;p<0.001)。在调整了患者和医院特征后,与 ORP 相比,RARP 与更高的总住院费用相关($11932 与 $9390;p<0.001)。我们的研究结果受到使用回顾性基于人群数据的研究设计的限制。
尽管 RARP 比 ORP 具有更低的并发症和更短的住院时间,但接受 RARP 治疗的患者的总住院费用高于接受 ORP 治疗的患者。