Healthcare and Indirect Cost of the Laparoscopic vs. Vaginal Approach in Benign Hysterectomy.

María Ángeles Martínez-Maestre, Francisco Jódar-Sánchez, Ana María Calderón-Cabrera, Carmen González-Cejudo, José Manuel Silván-Alfaro, Lidia María Melero-Cortés
{"title":"Healthcare and Indirect Cost of the Laparoscopic vs. Vaginal Approach in Benign Hysterectomy.","authors":"María Ángeles Martínez-Maestre,&nbsp;Francisco Jódar-Sánchez,&nbsp;Ana María Calderón-Cabrera,&nbsp;Carmen González-Cejudo,&nbsp;José Manuel Silván-Alfaro,&nbsp;Lidia María Melero-Cortés","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to analyze indirect costs of vaginal and laparoscopic routes for hysterectomy to determine whether this makes a difference in total costs when considering route for surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A five-year observational retrospective cohort study was conducted in an academic tertiary care center. A total of 517 patients scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy (n = 137) and vaginal hysterectomy (n = 380) for benign conditions between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 meeting inclusion criteria were reviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Indirect costs were higher in the vaginal hysterectomy group compared to the laparoscopic hysterectomy group (mean cost €3,239.86 vs. €1,371.58; cost increase of €1,868.28; p < .001). Indirect costs due to lost-work-productivity were the most important, represented by 97.7% in the vaginal group and 93.6% in the laparoscopic group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign disease, laparoscopic hysterectomy appears to be superior to vaginal hysterectomy when indirect costs are analyzed in a five-year temporal horizon. Laparoscopic hysterectomy is a good alternative to vaginal hysterectomy when technically feasible as both present comparable advantages. The surgical approach to hysterectomy should be decided in light of the relative benefits and hazards, which will depend on clinical circumstances and surgical expertise.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6a/0e/e2022.00048.PMC9521634.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background and objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze indirect costs of vaginal and laparoscopic routes for hysterectomy to determine whether this makes a difference in total costs when considering route for surgery.

Methods: A five-year observational retrospective cohort study was conducted in an academic tertiary care center. A total of 517 patients scheduled for total laparoscopic hysterectomy (n = 137) and vaginal hysterectomy (n = 380) for benign conditions between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 meeting inclusion criteria were reviewed.

Results: Indirect costs were higher in the vaginal hysterectomy group compared to the laparoscopic hysterectomy group (mean cost €3,239.86 vs. €1,371.58; cost increase of €1,868.28; p < .001). Indirect costs due to lost-work-productivity were the most important, represented by 97.7% in the vaginal group and 93.6% in the laparoscopic group.

Conclusion: Among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign disease, laparoscopic hysterectomy appears to be superior to vaginal hysterectomy when indirect costs are analyzed in a five-year temporal horizon. Laparoscopic hysterectomy is a good alternative to vaginal hysterectomy when technically feasible as both present comparable advantages. The surgical approach to hysterectomy should be decided in light of the relative benefits and hazards, which will depend on clinical circumstances and surgical expertise.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腹腔镜与阴道良性子宫切除术的医疗保健和间接费用。
背景和目的:本研究的目的是分析阴道和腹腔镜子宫切除术的间接成本,以确定在考虑手术路线时,这是否会导致总成本的差异。方法:在某学术三级保健中心进行为期五年的观察性回顾性队列研究。本研究回顾了2008年1月1日至2012年12月31日期间517例符合纳入标准的良性条件的腹腔镜全子宫切除术(n = 137)和阴道子宫切除术(n = 380)。结果:阴道子宫切除术组的间接费用高于腹腔镜子宫切除术组(平均费用为3,239.86欧元对1,371.58欧元;成本增加1,868.28欧元;p结论:在因良性疾病而行子宫切除术的妇女中,腹腔镜子宫切除术似乎优于阴道子宫切除术,在5年的时间范围内分析间接成本。当技术可行时,腹腔镜子宫切除术是阴道子宫切除术的好选择,因为两者都具有相当的优势。子宫切除术的手术方法应根据相对的利弊来决定,这将取决于临床情况和外科专家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
期刊最新文献
Hysterectomy for Large Uterus by Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS). Surgeons' Approach to Intraoperative Complications in Total Extraperitoneal (TEP) Hernia Repair. Inferior-Medial Approach to Laparoscopic Splenic Vessel-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy. Comparative Analysis of Hemostasis and Staple-Line Integrity between Medtronic Tri-StapleTM with Preloaded Buttress Material and the AEONTM Stapler in Bariatric Surgery. Current Status and Role of Artificial Intelligence in Anorectal Diseases and Pelvic Floor Disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1