Robotic Gastric Bypass Surgery in the Swiss Health Care System: Analysis of Hospital Costs and Reimbursement
Tóm tắt
Robotic technology shows some promising early outcomes indicating potentially improved outcomes particularly for challenging bariatric procedures. Still, health care providers face significant clinical and economic challenges when introducing innovations. Prospectively derived administrative cost data of patients who were coded with a primary diagnosis of obesity (ICD-10 code E.66.X), a procedure of gastric bypass surgery (CHOP code 44.3), and a robotic identifier (CHOP codes 00.90.50 or 00.39) during the years 2012 to 2015 was analyzed and compared to the triggered reimbursement for this patient cohort. A total of 348 patients were identified. The mean number of diagnoses was 2.7 and the mean length of stay was 5.9 days. The overall mean cost per patients was Swiss Francs (CHF) from 2012 to 2014 that was 21,527, with a mean reimbursement of CHF 24,917. Cost of the surgery in 2015 was comparable to the previous years with CHF 22,550.0 (p = 0.6618), but reimbursement decreased significantly to CHF 20,499.0 (0.0001). The average cost for robotic gastric bypass surgery fell well below the average reimbursement within the Swiss DRG system between 2012 and 2014, and this robotic procedure was a DRG winner for that period. However, the Swiss DRG system has matured over the years with a significant decrease resulting in a deficit for robotic gastric bypass surgery in 2015. This stipulates a discussion as to how health care providers should continue offering robotic gastric bypass surgery, particularly in the light of developing clinical evidence.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Snyder BE et al. Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: minimizing morbidity and mortality. Obes Surg. 2010;20(3):265–70.
Tieu K et al. Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: update from 2 high-volume centers. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013;9(2):284–8.
Hagen ME et al. The da Vinci surgical system in digestive surgery. Rev Med Suisse. 2007;3(117):1622–6. 6
Besson P Manuel REKOLE® – Comptabilité analytique à l’hôpital, 4e édition 2013, editor H+
Niklas C et al. da Vinci and open radical prostatectomy: comparison of clinical outcomes and analysis of insurance costs. Urol Int 2015
Ficarra V et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):418–30.
Ficarra V et al. Systematic review of methods for reporting combined outcomes after radical prostatectomy and proposal of a novel system: the survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):541–8.
Tewari A et al. Nerve sparing can preserve orgasmic function in most men after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2012;109(4):596–602.
Novara G et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):382–404.
Buchs et al (2014) Laparoscopic versus robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: lessons and long-term follow-up learned from a large prospective monocentric study. Obes Surg. 2014; 24(12)
Buchs et al. Robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for super obese patients: a comparative study. Obes Surg Mar. 2013;23(3):353–7.
Buchs et al. Learning curve for robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc 2012. 2012;26(4):116–21.