Suppr超能文献

机器人腹疝修补术的成本核算方法:一项范围综述

Costing methodologies in robotic ventral hernia repair: a scoping review.

作者信息

Nielsen Kristian Als, Kaiser Karsten, Helligsø Per, Natkunarajah Goutam, Ellebaek Mark Bremholm, Valorenzos Alexandros, Nielsen Michael Festersen

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.

Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.

出版信息

Hernia. 2025 May 23;29(1):182. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03358-z.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The financial aspects of robotic minimally invasive surgery (RMIS) remain controversial, with conflicting evidence regarding its cost compared to laparoscopic and open techniques, particularly in ventral hernia repair. This scoping review aims to systematically map the existing literature on robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair (rVHR) costs, the methodologies used in cost reporting, and explore how these methodological choices affect the validity of conclusions.

METHODS

Following Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we conducted a systematic search in Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane CENTRAL. We included studies reporting rVHR costs. Two independent researchers screened records and extracted data on study characteristics, costing methodology, perspectives, and costs.

RESULTS

Of the 4,856 screened records, 43 were included. The majority (74%) originated from the United States, and 95% consisted of basic cost-comparison studies with no full economic evaluations. Forty-two percent relied on hospital charges, while only 23% employed a top-down and/or bottom-up costing methodology. Seventy-seven percent of the studies adopted a hospital perspective, while 12% used a payer perspective. Among 36 studies comparing rVHR with non-robotic techniques, 49% found nonrobotic surgery to be less costly, 22% favored robotic surgery, and 29% found no significant cost difference. Cost breakdowns were inconsistently reported, with key components such as robotic system acquisition frequently omitted.

CONCLUSION

This review exposes a critical gap in the financial evidence surrounding rVHR. The absence of standardized costing methodology, reliance on partial economic evaluations, and inconsistent inclusion of key cost components limit the ability to assess the broader economic impact of rVHR. Standardized guidelines tailored to RMIS are needed to improve transparency, reproducibility, and validity in future economic evaluations.

摘要

目的

机器人辅助微创手术(RMIS)的财务状况仍存在争议,与腹腔镜手术和开放手术相比,其成本证据相互矛盾,尤其是在腹疝修补术中。本综述旨在系统梳理关于机器人辅助腹疝修补术(rVHR)成本的现有文献、成本报告中使用的方法,并探讨这些方法选择如何影响结论的有效性。

方法

遵循乔安娜·布里格斯研究所和PRISMA - ScR指南,我们在Ovid EMBASE、Ovid MEDLINE和Cochrane CENTRAL中进行了系统检索。我们纳入了报告rVHR成本的研究。两名独立研究人员筛选记录并提取有关研究特征、成本核算方法、视角和成本的数据。

结果

在筛选的4856条记录中,纳入了43条。大多数(74%)来自美国,95%为基本成本比较研究,没有完整的经济评估。42%依赖医院收费,而只有23%采用自上而下和/或自下而上的成本核算方法。77%的研究采用医院视角,12%采用支付方视角。在36项比较rVHR与非机器人技术的研究中,49%发现非机器人手术成本更低,22%支持机器人手术,29%发现无显著成本差异。成本明细报告不一致,经常遗漏机器人系统购置等关键组成部分。

结论

本综述揭示了rVHR财务证据方面的关键差距。缺乏标准化的成本核算方法、依赖部分经济评估以及关键成本组成部分纳入不一致,限制了评估rVHR更广泛经济影响的能力。需要针对RMIS制定标准化指南,以提高未来经济评估的透明度、可重复性和有效性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验