Ferrari Deisi, Lopes Thiago J A, França Paulo F A, Azevedo Fábio M, Pappas Evangelos
University of São Paulo, Post-Graduation Program Interunits Bioengineering EESC/FMRP/IQSC-USP, São Carlos, Brazil; CAPES Foundation, Ministry of Education of Brazil, Brasília, DF 70.040-020, Brazil.
Discipline of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Research Laboratory of Exercise Science, The Brazilian Navy, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Knee. 2017 Mar;24(2):197-206. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2017.01.002. Epub 2017 Jan 20.
Efforts to reduce the financial costs related to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) include reducing the length of hospitalization of the patient undergoing ACLR. However, it is unclear if inpatient and outpatient ACLR differ in terms of safety, satisfaction, costs and clinical outcomes.
To systematically review and synthesize the literature that directly compared costs and outcomes after outpatient and inpatient ACLR.
Studies that directly compared outcomes of inpatient and outpatient ACLR were retrieved via searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases. Random effects meta-analysis and descriptive analysis were performed for relevant outcomes.
Costs analysis suggests that outpatient ACLR may be a cost effective procedure with savings ranging from $1371 to $7390. There were no differences for systemic and local complications p=0.64 (odds ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 13.49) and p=0.72 (0.81, 0.26 to 2.56) respectively, or pain in the second and seventh days after surgery, p=0.78 (mean difference -0.16; 95% confidence interval -1.28 to 0.96) and p=0.44 (0.48, -0.75 to 1.71), respectively. However, the outpatient group had less pain than the inpatient group in the first and third days after surgery, p=0.0001 (-0.39, -0.57 to -0.21) and p=0.0001(-0.39, -0.39 to -0.20), respectively. Descriptive analysis revealed that the outpatient group experienced similar or better satisfaction, strength and knee function compared to the inpatient group.
Complications, pain, satisfaction, knee function and strength are similar or better after outpatient compared to inpatient ACLR. Furthermore, cost savings may be achieved with outpatient ACLR. However, included studies presented low methodological quality and the quality of evidence was very low, so these results need to be confirmed by future studies.
PROSPERO (CRD42015024990).
降低前交叉韧带重建术(ACLR)相关财务成本的努力包括缩短接受ACLR患者的住院时间。然而,尚不清楚门诊和住院ACLR在安全性、满意度、成本和临床结果方面是否存在差异。
系统回顾和综合直接比较门诊和住院ACLR后成本和结果的文献。
通过检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、AMED、Cochrane、SPORTDiscus、科学引文索引和Scopus数据库,检索直接比较住院和门诊ACLR结果的研究。对相关结果进行随机效应荟萃分析和描述性分析。
成本分析表明,门诊ACLR可能是一种具有成本效益的手术,节省费用从1371美元到7390美元不等。全身和局部并发症分别为p = 0.64(优势比1.65,95%置信区间0.20至13.49)和p = 0.72(0.81,0.26至2.56),或术后第二天和第七天的疼痛,p = 0.78(平均差 -0.16;95%置信区间 -1.28至0.96)和p = 0.44(0.48,-0.75至1.71),均无差异。然而,门诊组在术后第一天和第三天的疼痛程度低于住院组,分别为p = 0.0001(-0.39,-0.57至 -0.21)和p = 0.0001(-0.39,-0.39至 -0.20)。描述性分析显示,与住院组相比,门诊组的满意度、力量和膝关节功能相似或更好。
与住院ACLR相比,门诊ACLR后的并发症、疼痛、满意度、膝关节功能和力量相似或更好。此外,门诊ACLR可能实现成本节约。然而,纳入研究的方法学质量较低,证据质量非常低,因此这些结果需要未来研究加以证实。
PROSPERO(CRD42015024990)。