These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy vs. abdominal hysterectomy in a community hospital. A cost comparison.
    Author: Simon NV, Laveran RL, Cavanaugh S, Gerlach DH, Jackson JR.
    Journal: J Reprod Med; 1999 Apr; 44(4):339-45. PubMed ID: 10319303.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility for an institution to offer laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy as a cost-effective alternative to total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in a managed care environment. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study in which 138 consecutive laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomies performed between December 1992 and May 1996 were reviewed and compared to 354 consecutive TAHs performed during the same period. Operating time, use of operative room supplies, length of stay and actual total, fixed and variable costs of each case were calculated for the entire hospital stay and for each hospital cost center. Differences between costs were analyzed by ANCOVA using age, patient weight, specimen weight and number of operative procedures performed at the time of hysterectomy as covariants. RESULTS: The mean operative room time was significantly greater for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (167.4 [SD 51.2] vs. 103 minutes [30.3, P < .001]). In contrast, length of stay was significantly shorter for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (0.8 [SD 1.1] vs. 3.4 days [.9, P < .001]). The adjusted mean costs of both operative room time and supplies were significantly higher for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (P < .001). In contrast, the mean cost of length of stay for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy was significantly lower (P < .001). However, the adjusted mean total costs of the entire hospital stay were not significantly different: $2,716 for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy vs. $2,702 for TAH (F = .7, P = .8). The absence of significant differences between procedures resulted from our limited use of disposable supplies (no automated stapling device) and from shorter lengths of stay, which compensated well for the higher operative room costs of time and supplies incurred with laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is, at least in the short term, a cost-effective alternative to TAH in a managed care environment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]