机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术后当天出院的进展;无需常规血液检查即可安全且经济高效地出院。

IF 2 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Research and Reports in Urology Pub Date : 2023-10-09 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.2147/RRU.S429819
Bodie Chislett, Ghadir Omran, Michael Harvey, Damien Bolton, Nathan Lawrentschuk
{"title":"机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术后当天出院的进展;无需常规血液检查即可安全且经济高效地出院。","authors":"Bodie Chislett,&nbsp;Ghadir Omran,&nbsp;Michael Harvey,&nbsp;Damien Bolton,&nbsp;Nathan Lawrentschuk","doi":"10.2147/RRU.S429819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Changing population demographics and the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have forever changed healthcare, with increasing demands on straining systems. The economic cost is yet to be fully realised, with growing concerns around the current system's ability to accommodate the ageing comorbid population. Consequently, a paradigm shift has taken place in healthcare systems, prioritizing cost accountability. In the absence of established guidelines or robust literature, the use of laboratory tests postoperatively is often guided solely by clinician preference. This study presents a retrospective analysis that investigates the utility and cost implications of routine postoperative investigation following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies. The findings aim to emphasise the importance of evidence-based practices and cost-effective approaches in postoperative care.</p><p><strong>Materials/methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was performed on all robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) identified from a single institution between 29th June 2017 to 28th June 2019. This interval was chosen in an attempt to avoid bias or confounding variables associated with the SRS-CoV-2 pandemic. A single clinician conducted a comprehensive medical record review using unit record numbers corresponding to identified procedural codes. Demographics and variables were recorded, including postoperative test results, hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. Patients were assigned to either 'Routine Postoperative tests' (RPOT) or 'No Routine Postoperative tests' (No RPOT) and a comparative analysis was performed. Using the Australian National Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) pricing guide, total expenditure was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 319 patients were included in the study with an average of 2.5 tests per patient within the first 24 hours. Routine postoperative tests had no bearing on outcomes, with comparable readmission rates between cohorts, and a significantly shorter length of stay in the \"No routine postoperative tests\" group when compared to the \"Routine Postoperative Tests\". A total of 1028 tests were performed within the first 48 hours following surgery with expenditure on routine testing totalling $20,516 based on the Australian PBS pricing schedule. Abnormal results were returned on 96% of patients. In the RPOT group, 18 out of the 20 common interventions occurred from 302 RARP. Among the patients in the RPOT group, eight individuals underwent blood transfusions. However, none of these patients met the hospital-specific criteria for transfusion, which require a hemoglobin level below 70 or symptomatic presentation with a hemoglobin level below 80.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The data suggests routine postoperative laboratory has no bearing on re-admission rates, with patients experiencing significantly shorter hospital stays. Furthermore, our results indicate inefficient use of routine postoperative laboratory, with few clinical interventions, frequent abnormal results, and significant accumulative expenses.</p>","PeriodicalId":21008,"journal":{"name":"Research and Reports in Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/71/rru-15-471.PMC10575481.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Progressing Towards Same-Day Discharges After Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy; Safe and Cost Effective to Discharge Without Routine Blood Tests.\",\"authors\":\"Bodie Chislett,&nbsp;Ghadir Omran,&nbsp;Michael Harvey,&nbsp;Damien Bolton,&nbsp;Nathan Lawrentschuk\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/RRU.S429819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Changing population demographics and the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have forever changed healthcare, with increasing demands on straining systems. The economic cost is yet to be fully realised, with growing concerns around the current system's ability to accommodate the ageing comorbid population. Consequently, a paradigm shift has taken place in healthcare systems, prioritizing cost accountability. In the absence of established guidelines or robust literature, the use of laboratory tests postoperatively is often guided solely by clinician preference. This study presents a retrospective analysis that investigates the utility and cost implications of routine postoperative investigation following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies. The findings aim to emphasise the importance of evidence-based practices and cost-effective approaches in postoperative care.</p><p><strong>Materials/methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was performed on all robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) identified from a single institution between 29th June 2017 to 28th June 2019. This interval was chosen in an attempt to avoid bias or confounding variables associated with the SRS-CoV-2 pandemic. A single clinician conducted a comprehensive medical record review using unit record numbers corresponding to identified procedural codes. Demographics and variables were recorded, including postoperative test results, hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. Patients were assigned to either 'Routine Postoperative tests' (RPOT) or 'No Routine Postoperative tests' (No RPOT) and a comparative analysis was performed. Using the Australian National Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) pricing guide, total expenditure was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 319 patients were included in the study with an average of 2.5 tests per patient within the first 24 hours. Routine postoperative tests had no bearing on outcomes, with comparable readmission rates between cohorts, and a significantly shorter length of stay in the \\\"No routine postoperative tests\\\" group when compared to the \\\"Routine Postoperative Tests\\\". A total of 1028 tests were performed within the first 48 hours following surgery with expenditure on routine testing totalling $20,516 based on the Australian PBS pricing schedule. Abnormal results were returned on 96% of patients. In the RPOT group, 18 out of the 20 common interventions occurred from 302 RARP. Among the patients in the RPOT group, eight individuals underwent blood transfusions. However, none of these patients met the hospital-specific criteria for transfusion, which require a hemoglobin level below 70 or symptomatic presentation with a hemoglobin level below 80.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The data suggests routine postoperative laboratory has no bearing on re-admission rates, with patients experiencing significantly shorter hospital stays. Furthermore, our results indicate inefficient use of routine postoperative laboratory, with few clinical interventions, frequent abnormal results, and significant accumulative expenses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research and Reports in Urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/71/rru-15-471.PMC10575481.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research and Reports in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S429819\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Reports in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S429819","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:不断变化的人口结构和最近的严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型疫情永远改变了医疗保健,对紧张系统的需求越来越大。经济成本尚未完全实现,人们越来越担心当前系统适应老龄化共病人群的能力。因此,医疗保健系统发生了范式转变,优先考虑成本问责制。在缺乏既定指南或可靠文献的情况下,术后实验室测试的使用通常仅由临床医生的偏好指导。本研究提供了一项回顾性分析,调查机器人辅助前列腺根治术后常规术后调查的效用和成本影响。研究结果旨在强调循证实践和成本效益高的术后护理方法的重要性。材料/方法:对2017年6月29日至2019年6月28日期间从一家机构确定的所有机器人辅助前列腺根治术(RARP)进行回顾性分析。选择这一区间是为了避免与SRS-CoV-2大流行相关的偏见或混淆变量。一名临床医生使用与识别的程序代码相对应的单位记录编号进行了全面的医疗记录审查。记录人口统计学和变量,包括术后检查结果、住院时间和30天再次入院率。将患者分为“术后常规检查”(RPOT)或“无术后常规测试”(无RPOT),并进行比较分析。使用澳大利亚国家药品福利计划(PBS)定价指南,计算总支出。结果:共有319名患者被纳入研究,在前24小时内平均每位患者进行2.5次检测。常规术后检查与结果无关,队列之间的再入院率相当,与“常规术后测试”相比,“无常规术后检测”组的住院时间明显更短。在手术后的前48小时内,共进行了1028次检测,根据澳大利亚PBS定价表,常规检测支出总计20516美元。96%的患者出现异常结果。在RPOT组中,20种常见干预措施中有18种发生在302例RARP中。在RPOT组的患者中,有8人接受了输血。然而,这些患者都不符合医院特定的输血标准,即血红蛋白水平低于70或血红蛋白水平低于80的症状表现。结论:数据表明,常规术后实验室检查与再次入院率无关,患者住院时间明显缩短。此外,我们的研究结果表明,常规术后实验室的使用效率低下,临床干预措施很少,异常结果频繁,累积费用巨大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Progressing Towards Same-Day Discharges After Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy; Safe and Cost Effective to Discharge Without Routine Blood Tests.

Introduction: Changing population demographics and the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have forever changed healthcare, with increasing demands on straining systems. The economic cost is yet to be fully realised, with growing concerns around the current system's ability to accommodate the ageing comorbid population. Consequently, a paradigm shift has taken place in healthcare systems, prioritizing cost accountability. In the absence of established guidelines or robust literature, the use of laboratory tests postoperatively is often guided solely by clinician preference. This study presents a retrospective analysis that investigates the utility and cost implications of routine postoperative investigation following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies. The findings aim to emphasise the importance of evidence-based practices and cost-effective approaches in postoperative care.

Materials/methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on all robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) identified from a single institution between 29th June 2017 to 28th June 2019. This interval was chosen in an attempt to avoid bias or confounding variables associated with the SRS-CoV-2 pandemic. A single clinician conducted a comprehensive medical record review using unit record numbers corresponding to identified procedural codes. Demographics and variables were recorded, including postoperative test results, hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. Patients were assigned to either 'Routine Postoperative tests' (RPOT) or 'No Routine Postoperative tests' (No RPOT) and a comparative analysis was performed. Using the Australian National Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) pricing guide, total expenditure was calculated.

Results: A total of 319 patients were included in the study with an average of 2.5 tests per patient within the first 24 hours. Routine postoperative tests had no bearing on outcomes, with comparable readmission rates between cohorts, and a significantly shorter length of stay in the "No routine postoperative tests" group when compared to the "Routine Postoperative Tests". A total of 1028 tests were performed within the first 48 hours following surgery with expenditure on routine testing totalling $20,516 based on the Australian PBS pricing schedule. Abnormal results were returned on 96% of patients. In the RPOT group, 18 out of the 20 common interventions occurred from 302 RARP. Among the patients in the RPOT group, eight individuals underwent blood transfusions. However, none of these patients met the hospital-specific criteria for transfusion, which require a hemoglobin level below 70 or symptomatic presentation with a hemoglobin level below 80.

Conclusion: The data suggests routine postoperative laboratory has no bearing on re-admission rates, with patients experiencing significantly shorter hospital stays. Furthermore, our results indicate inefficient use of routine postoperative laboratory, with few clinical interventions, frequent abnormal results, and significant accumulative expenses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research and Reports in Urology
Research and Reports in Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Research and Reports in Urology is an international, peer-reviewed, open access, online journal. Publishing original research, reports, editorials, reviews and commentaries on all aspects of adult and pediatric urology in the clinic and laboratory including the following topics: Pathology, pathophysiology of urological disease Investigation and treatment of urological disease Pharmacology of drugs used for the treatment of urological disease Although the main focus of the journal is to publish research and clinical results in humans; preclinical, animal and in vitro studies will be published where they will shed light on disease processes and potential new therapies. Issues of patient safety and quality of care will also be considered.
期刊最新文献
Fucoidan Ameliorates Testosterone-Induced Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) in Rats. Bladder Pain Syndrome (BPS): A Comprehensive Review of Treatment Strategies and Management Approaches. An Evaluation of the Postvoid Residual Urine Volume in Acute Stroke Patients. General Obesity and Prostate Cancer in Relation to Abdominal Obesity and Ethnic Groups: A US Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study. Incidence and Recurrence of Urinary Tract Infections Caused by Uropathogenic Escherichia coli: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
×
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