ArticleHealth services insights2024
Cost Analysis of Outpatient Colectomy in a Tertiary Center: A Projected Medico-Economic Evaluation.
Article in Health services insights, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postoperative complications and hospital costs following elective and emergency colon cancer surgery: a Clavien-Dindo grade-specific cost analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Cost-saving strategies for sustainable surgical care: a scoping review of efficiency models and potential approaches for low-income and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Temporal trends in outpatient right colectomy: a contemporary multistate study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Unsupervised Machine Learning to Identify Patient Clusters and Tailor Perioperative Care in Colorectal Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim of the study: Short stay processes are incentives to unburden chronically stressed healthcare systems. The aim of this study is to analyze financial implications of day admission (DAS) and outpatient strategies for colon resections in a prospective payment system (PPS) using Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) coding. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing left and right colonic resections between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020 were included. Medico-economic evaluations of the virtual outpatient and day admission surgery groups based on predefined criteria were compared to the identical group of patients who underwent surgery in the actual traditional inpatient setting. In a second step, postoperative complications of the virtual outpatient group were assessed. Cost-revenue analysis was performed using a micro-costing approach including direct medical costs. Results: Overall (N = 257), 97 (37.7%) colectomies would have been potentially eligible for an outpatient strategy. The global costs of the actual inpatient strategy totaled USD 3 634 392 with a global revenue of USD 3 571 069, corresponding to a cost coverage rate of 98%. The result of the virtual DAS strategy would have been a net loss of USD 15 800 (coverage rate of 99%) due to 4 low length of stay outliers triggering a reimbursement reduction and preventing a positive net result of USD 16 208. The pilot reference outpatient case's revenue and cost amounted to respectively USD 7479 and USD 6911 (cost coverage of 108%). Conclusion: From both any given hospital and healthcare system point of view, elective outpatient colectomy for selected patients is the most cost-saving option. However, in a prospective payment system implemented to avoid bad incentives, the latter can unintentionally disadvantage best performing hospitals and impede widespread adoption of high-value strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.