Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30488194›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019

Regional cost analysis for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Elizabeth M Pontarelli, Gary G Grinberg, Richard S Isaacs, James P Morris, Olakunle Ajayi, Pandu R Yenumula

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth M PontarelliKaiser Permanente South Sacramento, 6600 Bruceville Rd., Sacramento, CA, 95823, USA. Elizabeth.m.pontarelli@kp.org.
Gary G GrinbergKaiser Permanente South Sacramento, 6600 Bruceville Rd., Sacramento, CA, 95823, USA.
Richard S IsaacsThe Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA, USA.
James P MorrisThe Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA, USA.
Olakunle AjayiThe Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA, USA.
Pandu R YenumulaKaiser Permanente South Sacramento, 6600 Bruceville Rd., Sacramento, CA, 95823, USA.
Colorado Permanente Medical Group · USKaiser Permanente South Sacramento Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy is the most common procedure performed by general surgeons in the United States, with approximately 600,000 procedures performed annually. As the cost of care rises, there is increasing emphasis on utilization and quality. Our objective was to evaluate the cost of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in our health system and to compare the operative times and outcomes at high- and low-cost centers.

methodsWe evaluated all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed in our system over a 1-year period. The operating room supply costs and procedure durations were obtained for each of the hospitals. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program outcomes and demographics were compared to the costs for each hospital.

resultsDuring the study period, 7601 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed at 20 hospitals (170-759/hospital) by 227 surgeons. The average cost per case ranged from $296 at the lowest cost center to $658 at the highest cost center. The average operative time varied between sites from 46 to 95 min. There was no association between cost and operative time or case volume. There was a slight trend toward increased cost with higher number of emergency procedures, but this was not well correlated (R

conclusionPerforming laparoscopic cholecystectomy with reusable instruments can significantly decrease costs and does not increase operative time or postoperative complications.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicCost SavingsFemaleHospital CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperating RoomsOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsSurgical InstrumentsUnited StatesCostInstrumentLaparoscopic cholecystectomyUtilization

Identifiers

PMID30488194
OpenAlexW2902989955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.