Effect of patient factors on hospital costs for major bowel surgery: implications for managed health care

'Fast track' postoperative management protocol for patients with high co-morbidity undergoing complex abdominal and pelvic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

A combination of factors has emphasized the need to reduce postoperative stay after surgery. Multimodal care plans may shorten hospital stay, but have been associated with high readmission rates and are generally reserved for straightforward, non-complicated colonic (not rectal) resections. This study evaluated a 'fast track' protocol in patients undergoing major colonic and rectal surgery.

METHODS

Sixty consecutive patients (median age 44.5 (range 13-70) years) underwent major procedures over a 6-week period on one colorectal service. Nasogastric tubes and epidural anaesthesia were not used. Patients participated in a protocol of early diet and early ambulation, and were discharged after meeting defined criteria.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients (97 per cent) were deemed suitable for the 'fast track' approach at the time of surgery and stayed for a mean(s.d.) of 4.3(1.6) days after operation. Patients in diagnosis-related group (DRG) 148 (colorectal resection with co-morbidity; n = 40) stayed for 4.6(1.7) days, which was longer than those in DRG 149 (without co-morbidity; n = 18) who stayed 3.5(0.8) days (P = 0.01). Three patients (5 per cent) required a nasogastric tube for vomiting. There were no readmissions directly attributable to 'fast track' failure, although four patients (7 per cent) were readmitted within 30 days of operation for other reasons. Eight poorly compliant patients stayed for 5.1(1.1) days (P = 0.02 versus compliant patients). 'Fast track' patients had a shorter length of stay than patients receiving traditional care on other colorectal services during the same time period (compared by DRG 148, DRG 149 and for all patients) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The 'fast track' protocol allows patients with high levels of co-morbidity undergoing complex colorectal and reoperative pelvic surgery to benefit from a rapid recovery and early discharge from hospital. The approach is safe and has low readmission rates.

Trauma services: a profit center?

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated inadequate reimbursement for severely injured patients with a resultant negative economic impact for the trauma service and hospital. The purpose of this study was to assess the total cost of care for all injured patients discharged from the trauma service in fiscal year 1997, and to determine the proportion of costs for the most severely injured on total cost. In addition, we assessed the total service costs and the revenue for treatment of the most severely ill. The final result was the determination of the profit (loss) margin for the entire service.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients discharged from our Level I Trauma Center in fiscal year 1997 were included (n = 696). The population was then stratified into 2 subgroups using the Injury Severity Score (ISS). Patient grouping was facilitated by integration of the trauma registry with the hospital cost accounting system. The population was sub-divided into 2 distinct groups. Group A represented all patients with an ISS >15 (n = 192). Group B contained all patients with an ISS <15 (n = 504). Length of stay and mortality of each group was recorded. Cost of care was determined by the hospital cost accounting system TSI (Transition System Incorporated, Boston, MA), which is designed to generate cost center data on a cost per patient basis. Total costs were determined for the entire population and Groups A and B. The proportion of costs consumed by each group was then calculated. Reimbursement was determined by calculating expected payments for each patient. These calculations are based on previously agreed upon allowances from each insurer and are reconciled at the end of each fiscal year to ensure accuracy.

RESULTS

The average length of stay for the population and Groups A and B were 7.5, 9.8, and 6.7 days respectively. Mortality in each group was 9.7%, 19.3%, and 6%. Over 92% of the population sustained blunt mechanism injury and only 8% were penetrating. When controlled for length of stay, the profit margin for Group A is $1,242/day and for Group B is $519/day. Comparison of mean cost/patient between Group A and Group B was $35,727 versus $17,623, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Trauma centers can be profitable. Group A is responsible for 44% of the total service cost while accounting for only 28% of the discharges. Moreover, this group is responsible for 57% of the profit, and yields the greatest return. The ability to care for the sickest patients, while enormously costly, is essential to the economic viability of the trauma center and its future growth.

"Ideal" length of stay after colectomy: whose ideal?

PURPOSE

In response to external pressure to achieve an idealized length of stay after colon resection, a study was designed to define perioperative factors that significantly impact average length of stay (ALOS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 226 patients undergoing open colon resection from 1988 to 1995 to determine the effects of age, type of procedure, nature of the procedure (elective vs. emergency), and postoperative course on ALOS. Statistics were calculated by Student's t-test, chi-squared analysis, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Average length of stay was 10 (range, 4-34) days, with a significant trend toward lower ALOS in recent years; ALOS in 1988 averaged 11 days, whereas in 1994, ALOS averaged 9 days (r2 = 0.118; P < 0.001). Patients younger than 65 years of age had an ALOS of 9 days vs. 11 days in patients older than 65 years (P = 0.0024). Patients with anastomoses on the right and left side had similar ALOS (8.5 vs. 9.1 days), whereas creation of a stoma was associated with a significantly higher ALOS (12.1 days; P < 0.00001). The need for postoperative nasogastric intubation (14.9 vs. 9.3 days) and the performance of emergency operations (12.2 vs. 6.5 days) were also associated with a significantly higher ALOS (P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Caution must be exercised in accepting rigid criteria for length of stay for patients undergoing colorectal resections, as uncontrollable clinical variables are involved in defining the "ideal" patient.

Economics of pancreatoduodenectomy in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Managed care and the increasing percentage of surgical procedures performed in the elderly have renewed the focus on hospital charges and expenditures. The objective of this study was to determine whether septuagenarians and octogenarians accrue more hospital charges or have a higher risk of morbidity and death.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charges and pertinent clinical outcomes data that were available on 70 of the last 100 pancreatoduodenectomies performed at our institution (1989 to 1994). Charges from four cost centers were analyzed and normalized to 1995 dollars by using the Consumer Price Index and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1, 70 years of age or older (n = 21); group 2, younger than 70 years of age (n = 49).

RESULTS

Anesthetic charges were $2657 +/- $835 for group 1 versus $2815 +/- $826 for group 2, which was not a statistically significant difference. Laboratory charges were $4650 +/- $3284 for group 1 versus $5969 +/- $5169 for group 2, which was not a significant difference. Pharmaceutical charges were $5424 +/- $4435 for group 1 versus $9243 +/- $9695 for group 2, which was not a significant difference. Charges for operative units were $6198 +/- $1671 for group 1 versus $7469 +/- $2116 for group 2, p < 0.02. Total charges were $41,180 +/- $20,635 for group 1 versus $50,968 +/- $33,783 for group 2, which was not a significant difference. No difference was noted in morbidity, mortality, length of stay, or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatoduodenectomy in the elderly can be performed safely without accruing higher cost, increased morbidity, or increased mortality.