Does adoption of new technology increase surgical volume? The robotic inguinal hernia repair model.


Journal

Journal of robotic surgery
ISSN: 1863-2491
Titre abrégé: J Robot Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101300401

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Historique:
received: 30 06 2021
accepted: 29 08 2021
pubmed: 14 9 2021
medline: 28 7 2022
entrez: 13 9 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Robotic Inguinal Hernia repair has been associated with higher costs but shorter length of stay. Robotic surgery is an appealing option for patients undergoing elective hernia surgery however given the high startup, maintenance and operating costs, the adoption of robotic technology may not guarantee increased profitability. Our hypothesis is that the introduction of robotic technology increases the overall surgical volume of inguinal hernia repairs within a hospital as compared to non-robotic hospitals. The 2010-2018 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration Ambulatory Patient data were queried for Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic inguinal hernia repairs using ICD9, ICD10 and CPT codes. Using a difference in difference (DID) technique, we determined the difference of the total hernia volume of robotic hospitals pre- and post-adoption of robotic technology. In addition, selected hospitals which were early adopters of robotic technology were compared to with their surrounding non-robotic competitor hospitals. Incident Rate Ratios-IRR, from the difference in difference analysis determined the significance of robotic technology. Hospital and patient demographic data were evaluated, and chi square test were used to determine statistical significance. p < 0.05 was considered significant. There were a total of 258,785 inguinal hernia repairs (5774 Robotic, 88,265 Laparoscopic and 164,746 Open) performed at 398 hospitals, 94 of which had robotic capabilities. Of all the procedure types, around 90% were primary inguinal hernia repairs. The majority of patients in this cohort were white non-Hispanic or Latino males (85%, 84%, 92%), age group 51-70 (46%), holding commercial health insurance (43%) and belonged to the lowest Charlson comorbidity index level (82%). Facility types designation for almost all robotic hospitals was hospital (99%), whereas 65% of non-robotic hospitals were ambulatory surgery centers and all other hospitals. Robotic hospitals experienced a 9.5% increase in total volume of inguinal hernia repairs after introduction of robotic technology (Incident Rate Ratios-IRR 1.095, p value < 0.0001). A significant increase in total hernia volume was observed for the early adopter hospitals with the IRR(s) ranging 1.20-2.51 (all p values < 0.0001), implying that adoption of robotic technology can in fact lead to very significant increase in total hernia volume for a hospital. The introduction of robotic technology leads to an increase in the overall volume of inguinal hernia repairs performed at a given hospital. To further evaluate the impact of robotic technology and significance of this methodology, additional work is underway using additional procedures and data from other states.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34515929
doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01304-6
pii: 10.1007/s11701-021-01304-6
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

833-839

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.

Références

Khorgami Z, Li WT, Jackson TN, Howard CA, Sclabas GM (2019) The cost of robotics: an analysis of the added costs of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery using the National Inpatient Sample. Surg Endosc 33(7):2217–2221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6507-3 (Epub 2018/10/18 PubMed PMID: 30327915)
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6507-3 pubmed: 30327915
Janjua H, Cousin-Peterson E, Barry TM, Kuo MC, Baker MS, Kuo PC (2020) The paradox of the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair in the inpatient setting. Am J Surg 219(3):497–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.012 (Epub 2019/09/29 PubMed PMID: 31558306)
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.012 pubmed: 31558306
Rana G, Armijo PR, Khan S, Bills N, Morien M, Zhang J et al (2020) Outcomes and impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair versus open inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and employee absenteeism. Surg Endosc 34(2):821–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06835-6 (Epub 2019/05/30 PubMed PMID: 31139991)
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06835-6 pubmed: 31139991
Janjua H, Cousin-Peterson E, Barry TM, Kuo MC, Baker MS, Kuo PC (2020) Robotic approach to outpatient inguinal hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 231(1):61–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.04.031 (Epub 2020/05/08 PubMed PMID: 32380165)
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.04.031 pubmed: 32380165
Porter ME (1985) Competitive Advantage, Ch. 1. The Free Press, New York, pp 11–15
[dataset] Ambulatory Patient Data File Agency for Health Care Administration State of Florida; 2010–2018
Sheetz KH, Claflin J, Dimick JB (2020) Trends in the adoption of robotic surgery for common surgical procedures. JAMA Netw Open 3(1):e1918911. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18911 (Epub 2020/01/11 PubMed PMID: 31922557; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC6991252)
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18911 pubmed: 31922557 pmcid: 6991252
Moloney R, O’Brien B, Coffey JC, Coffey A, Murphy F (2020) Patients’ perceptions after robot-assisted surgery: an integrative review. AORN J 112(2):133–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/aorn.13104 (Epub 2020/07/28 PubMed PMID: 32716545)
doi: 10.1002/aorn.13104 pubmed: 32716545
Bittner Iv JG, Cesnik LW, Kirwan T, Wolf L, Guo D (2018) Patient perceptions of acute pain and activity disruption following inguinal hernia repair: a propensity-matched comparison of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches. J Robot Surg 12(4):625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-018-0790-9 (Epub 2018/02/18 PubMed PMID: 29453731; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC6223756)
doi: 10.1007/s11701-018-0790-9 pubmed: 29453731 pmcid: 6223756
Amodeo A, Linares Quevedo A, Joseph JV, Belgrano E, Patel HR (2009) Robotic laparoscopic surgery: cost and training. Minerva Urol Nefrol 61(2):121–128 (Epub 2009/05/20 PubMed PMID: 19451894)
pubmed: 19451894
Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M (2018) Estimation of the acquisition and operating costs for robotic surgery. JAMA 320(8):835–836. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.9219
doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9219 pubmed: 30167686 pmcid: 6142989

Auteurs

Tara M Barry (TM)

Department of Surgery, USF Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 12901 Bruce B Downs Blvd, MDC 3129, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA. tbarry@usf.edu.

Haroon Janjua (H)

Department of Surgery, USF Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 12901 Bruce B Downs Blvd, MDC 3129, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA.

Christopher DuCoin (C)

Department of Surgery, USF Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 12901 Bruce B Downs Blvd, MDC 3129, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA.

Emanuel Eguia (E)

Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA.

Paul C Kuo (PC)

Department of Surgery, USF Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 12901 Bruce B Downs Blvd, MDC 3129, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH