Hillel Alexander T, Ochsner Matthew C, Johns Michael M, Klein Adam M
Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Laryngoscope. 2016 Jun;126(6):1385-9. doi: 10.1002/lary.25653. Epub 2015 Sep 30.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To assess the costs, charges, reimbursement, and efficiency of performing awake laryngology procedures in an endoscopy suite (ES) compared with like procedures performed in the operating room (OR).
Retrospective review of billing records.
Cost, charges, and reimbursements for the hospital, surgeon, and anesthesiologist were compared between ES injection laryngoplasty and laser excision procedures and matched case controls in the OR. Time spent in 1) the preoperative unit, 2) the operating or endoscopy suite, and 3) recovery unit were compared between OR and ES procedures.
Hospital expenses were significantly less for ES procedures when compared to OR procedures. Reimbursement was similar for ES and OR injection laryngoplasty, though greater for OR laser excisions. Net balance (reimbursement-expenses) was greater for ES procedures. A predictive model of payer costs over a 3-year period showed similar costs for ES and OR laser procedures and reduced costs for ES compared to OR injection laryngoplasty. Times spent preoperatively and the procedure were significantly less for ES procedures.
For individual laryngology procedures, the ES reduces time and costs compared to the OR, increasing otolaryngologist and hospital efficiency. This reveals cost and time savings of ES injection laryngoplasty, which occurs at a similar frequency as OR injection laryngoplasty. Given the increased frequency for ES laser procedures, total costs are similar for ES and OR laser excision of papilloma, which usually require repeated procedures. When regulated office space is unavailable, endoscopy rooms represent an alternative setting for unsedated laryngology procedures.
NA Laryngoscope, 126:1385-1389, 2016.
目的/假设:评估在内镜检查室(ES)进行清醒喉科手术与在手术室(OR)进行类似手术相比的成本、收费、报销情况及效率。
对计费记录进行回顾性研究。
比较ES注射喉成形术和激光切除术与OR中匹配病例对照的医院、外科医生和麻醉医生的成本、收费及报销情况。比较OR和ES手术在1)术前单元、2)手术室或内镜检查室、3)恢复单元所花费的时间。
与OR手术相比,ES手术的医院费用显著更低。ES和OR注射喉成形术的报销情况相似,不过OR激光切除术的报销更多。ES手术的净余额(报销-费用)更高。一个为期3年的支付方成本预测模型显示,ES和OR激光手术的成本相似,与OR注射喉成形术相比,ES的成本降低。ES手术术前和手术所花费的时间显著更少。
对于单个喉科手术,与OR相比,ES可减少时间和成本,提高耳鼻喉科医生和医院的效率。这表明ES注射喉成形术可节省成本和时间,其发生频率与OR注射喉成形术相似。鉴于ES激光手术的频率增加,ES和OR切除乳头状瘤的激光手术总成本相似,乳头状瘤通常需要重复手术。当没有规定的办公空间时,内镜检查室是进行非镇静喉科手术的另一种场所。
NA 《喉镜》,2016年,第126卷,第1385 - 1389页