Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Cost analysis of the stroke volume variation guided perioperative hemodynamic optimization - an economic evaluation of the SVVOPT trial results

J. Benes, J. Zatloukal, A. Simanova, I. Chytra, E. Kasal,

. 2014 ; 14 (-) : 40.

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc14064302

BACKGROUND: Perioperative goal directed therapy (GDT) can substantially improve the outcomes of high risk surgical patients as shown by many clinical studies. However, the approach needs initial investment and can increase the already very high staff workload. These economic imperatives may be at least partly responsible for weak adherence to the GDT concept. A few models are available for the evaluation of GDT cost-effectiveness, but studies of real economic data based on a recent clinical trial are lacking. In order to address this we have performed a retrospective analysis of the data from the "Intraoperative fluid optimization using stroke volume variation in high risk surgical patients" trial (ISRCTN95085011). METHODS: The health-care payers perspective was used in order to evaluate the perioperative hemodynamic optimization costs. Hospital invoices from all patients included in the trial were extracted. A direct comparison between the study (GDT, N = 60) and control (N = 60) groups was performed. A cost tree was constructed and major cost drivers evaluated. RESULTS: The trial showed a significant improvement in clinical outcomes for GDT treated patients. The mean cost per patient were lower in the GDT group 2877 ± 2336€ vs. 3371 ± 3238€ in controls, but without reaching a statistical significance (p = 0.596). The mean cost of all items except for intraoperative monitoring and infusions were lower for GDT than control but due to the high variability they all failed to reach statistical significance. Those costs associated with clinical care (68 ± 177€ vs. 212 ± 593€; p = 0.023) and ward stay costs (213 ± 108€ vs. 349 ± 467€; p = 0.082) were the most important differences in favour of the GDT group. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative fluid optimization with the use of stroke volume variation and Vigileo/FloTrac system showed not only a substantial improvement of morbidity, but was associated with an economic benefit. The cost-savings observed in the overall costs of postoperative care trend to offset the investment needed to run the GDT strategy and intraoperative monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN95085011.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc14064302
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20210121102048.0
007      
ta
008      
140704s2014 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1186/1471-2253-14-40 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)24891837
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Benes, Jan $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Alej svobody 80, 304 60 Plzen, Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Cost analysis of the stroke volume variation guided perioperative hemodynamic optimization - an economic evaluation of the SVVOPT trial results / $c J. Benes, J. Zatloukal, A. Simanova, I. Chytra, E. Kasal,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Perioperative goal directed therapy (GDT) can substantially improve the outcomes of high risk surgical patients as shown by many clinical studies. However, the approach needs initial investment and can increase the already very high staff workload. These economic imperatives may be at least partly responsible for weak adherence to the GDT concept. A few models are available for the evaluation of GDT cost-effectiveness, but studies of real economic data based on a recent clinical trial are lacking. In order to address this we have performed a retrospective analysis of the data from the "Intraoperative fluid optimization using stroke volume variation in high risk surgical patients" trial (ISRCTN95085011). METHODS: The health-care payers perspective was used in order to evaluate the perioperative hemodynamic optimization costs. Hospital invoices from all patients included in the trial were extracted. A direct comparison between the study (GDT, N = 60) and control (N = 60) groups was performed. A cost tree was constructed and major cost drivers evaluated. RESULTS: The trial showed a significant improvement in clinical outcomes for GDT treated patients. The mean cost per patient were lower in the GDT group 2877 ± 2336€ vs. 3371 ± 3238€ in controls, but without reaching a statistical significance (p = 0.596). The mean cost of all items except for intraoperative monitoring and infusions were lower for GDT than control but due to the high variability they all failed to reach statistical significance. Those costs associated with clinical care (68 ± 177€ vs. 212 ± 593€; p = 0.023) and ward stay costs (213 ± 108€ vs. 349 ± 467€; p = 0.082) were the most important differences in favour of the GDT group. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative fluid optimization with the use of stroke volume variation and Vigileo/FloTrac system showed not only a substantial improvement of morbidity, but was associated with an economic benefit. The cost-savings observed in the overall costs of postoperative care trend to offset the investment needed to run the GDT strategy and intraoperative monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN95085011.
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Zatloukal, Jan $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Alej svobody 80, 304 60 Plzen, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Simanova, Alena $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Alej svobody 80, 304 60 Plzen, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Chytra, Ivan $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Alej svobody 80, 304 60 Plzen, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Kasal, Eduard $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University Medical School and Teaching Hospital, Alej svobody 80, 304 60 Plzen, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00006769 $t BMC anesthesiology $x 1471-2253 $g Roč. 14, č. - (2014), s. 40
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24891837 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20140704 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20210121102047 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ind $b bmc $g 1031786 $s 863034
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2014 $b 14 $c - $d 40 $i 1471-2253 $m BMC anesthesiology $n BMC Anesthesiol $x MED00006769
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20140704

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...