Comparison of cost-effectiveness and postoperative outcomes following integration of a stiff shaft glidewire into percutaneous nephrolithotripsy.
cost analysis
nephrolithiasis
percutaneous nephrolithotomy
stone disease
technology
urolithiasis
Journal
Therapeutic advances in urology
ISSN: 1756-2872
Titre abrégé: Ther Adv Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101487328
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
23
03
2020
accepted:
05
01
2021
entrez:
30
8
2021
pubmed:
31
8
2021
medline:
31
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To analyze the cost effectiveness of integrating a stiff shaft glidewire (SSGW) in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) relative to standard technique (ST). This is prudent because healthcare providers are experiencing increased pressure to improve procedure-related cost containment. ST for PCNL at our institution involves a hydrophilic glidewire during initial percutaneous access and then two new stiff shaft wires. The SSGW is a hydrophilic wire used for initial access and the remainder of the procedure. We collected operating room (OR) costs for all primary, unilateral PCNL cases over a 5-month period during which ST for PCNL was used at a single institution with a single surgeon and compared with a 6-month period during which a SSGW was used. Mean costs for each period were then compared along with stone-free rates and complications. We included 17 total cases in the ST group and 22 in the SSGW group. The average operating room supply cost for the ST group was $1937.32 and $1559.39 in the SSGW group. The net difference of $377.93 represents a nearly 20% decrease in cost. This difference was statistically significant ( Transitioning to a SSGW has reduced OR supply cost by reducing the number of supplies required. The change in wire did not affect stone-free rates or complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34457040
doi: 10.1177/17562872211022306
pii: 10.1177_17562872211022306
pmc: PMC8385576
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
17562872211022306Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), 2021.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: The author(s) declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Références
World J Urol. 2015 Oct;33(10):1601-5
pubmed: 25614255
Tex Heart Inst J. 2016 Feb 01;43(1):4-6
pubmed: 27047277
Urology. 2014 May;83(5):1003-5
pubmed: 24529588
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Urol Int. 2019;102(2):153-159
pubmed: 30352443
J Endourol. 2017 Dec;31(12):1226-1230
pubmed: 29073769
Hosp Mater Manage Q. 1990 Nov;12(2):9-15
pubmed: 10107355