Cost-savings of short stay sleeve gastrectomy and walk-in hydration clinic versus conventional inpatient care

Cost-savings of short stay sleeve gastrectomy and walk-in hydration clinic versus conventional inpatient care

Objective We aim to evaluate the cost-saving of the short stay ward (SSW) versus conventional inpatient care following sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). We also compared the readmission rates pre- and post-inception of the intravenous hydration clinic and analyzed the cost-savings. Methods Patients who unde...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Surgical endoscopy Vol. 37; no. 11; pp. 8349 - 8356
Main Authors: Cheng, Stephanie, Lee, Phong Ching, Sim, Jacqueline X. L., Tan, Ai Shan, Ng, Cindy L. W., Foo, Angelina X. Y., Abdullah, Hairil Rizal Bin, Tan, Jeremy T. H., Ong, Hock Soo, Lim, Chin Hong
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: New York Springer US 01-11-2023
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects:
Abdominal Surgery
Analgesics
Anesthesia
Cardiovascular disease
Cost control
COVID-19
Disease transmission
Elective surgery
Endoscopy
Gastrectomy
Gastroenterology
Gastrointestinal surgery
Gynecology
Heart failure
Hepatology
Hospitalization
Hospitals
Humans
Hydration
Inpatients
Laparoscopy
Length of Stay
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Obesity, Morbid - surgery
Pandemics
Patient Readmission
Patients
Postoperative Complications
Proctology
Recovery (Medical)
Retrospective Studies
Surgeons
Surgery
Treatment Outcome
Value-driven care
Readmission
Short stay
Hydration clinic
Cost-saving
Bariatric surgery
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective We aim to evaluate the cost-saving of the short stay ward (SSW) versus conventional inpatient care following sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). We also compared the readmission rates pre- and post-inception of the intravenous hydration clinic and analyzed the cost-savings. Methods Patients who underwent LSG between December 2021 to March 2022 with SSW care were compared with standard inpatient care. Total costs were analyzed using univariate analysis. With a separate cohort of patients, 30-day readmission rates in the 12-months preceding and following implementation of the IV hydration clinic and associated cost-savings were evaluated. Results After matching on the propensity score to within ± 0.1, 20-subjects pairs were retained. The total cost per SSW-subject was significantly lower at $13,647.81 compared to $15,565.27 for conventional inpatient care ( p  = 0.0302). Lower average ward charges ($667.76 vs $1371.34, p  < 0.0001), lower average daily treatment fee per case ($235.68 vs $836.54, p  < 0.0001), and lower average laboratory investigation fee ($612.31 vs $797.21, p  < 0.0001) accounted for the difference in costs between the groups. Thirty-day readmission rate reduced from 8.9 to 1.8% after implementation of the hydration clinic ( p  < 0.01) with decreased 30-day readmission cost (S$96,955.57 vs. S$5910.27, p  < 0.01). Conclusion SSW for LSG is cost-effective and should be preferred to inpatient management. Walk-in hydration clinics significantly reduced readmission rates and result in tremendous cost-savings.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0930-2794
1432-2218
DOI:10.1007/s00464-023-10414-1