Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10930483

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

A M Merhoff·G C Merhoff·M E Franklin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is commonly performed and has been presumed to offer economic benefits similar to those of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study was done to examine that premise. METHODS: Two surgical groups contributed consecutively operated patients with a clinical diagnosis of appendicitis. One group did all appendectomies open and the other group did them laparoscopically. Hospital expenses were compared using a single billing formula. Hospital length of stay, time to return to work, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Operating room times were longer for the laparoscopic group, median 80 minutes, versus median 50 minutes for the open group. Hospital length of stay and return to work were the same, median 1 day and median 10 days, respectively. Wound complications were less common in the laparoscopic group, 0 of 30, than in the open group, 3 of 18; however, there was 1 intra-abdominal abscess in the laparoscopic group. Median cost of the laparoscopic group was $2,915 versus $1,747 for the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic appendectomy is more expensive than appendectomy but does not reduce hospital length of stay nor change the time to return to work; however, wound complications are less common.

Explore related subjects

AbsenteeismAcute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAgedAppendectomyAppendicitisChildCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHospital ChargesHospital CostsHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalTime FactorsWound InfectionComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A M Merhoff, G C Merhoff, M E Franklin. 2000. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9610(00)00373-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

National and state medical expenditures and lost earnings attributable to arthritis and other rheumatic conditions--United States, 2003.

Arthritis is the leading cause of disability in the United States, potentially limiting affected persons from walking a few blocks or climbing a flight of stairs. Using Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data, CDC analyzed national and state-specific direct costs (i.e., medical expenditures) and indirect costs (i.e., lost earnings) attributable to arthritis and other rheumatic conditions (AORC) in the United States during 2003. This report describes the results of that analysis, which indicated that, in 2003, the total cost of AORC in the United States was approximately 128 billion dollars (80.8 billion dollars in direct and 47.0 billion dollars in indirect costs), equivalent to 1.2% of the 2003 U.S. gross domestic product. Total costs attributable to AORC, by state/area, ranged from 225.5 million dollars in the District of Columbia to 12.1 billion dollars in California. Total costs attributable to AORC have increased substantially since 1997, and that increase is expected to continue because of the aging of the population and increases in obesity and physical inactivity. These findings signal the need for broader implementation of effective public health interventions, such as arthritis and chronic disease self-management programs, which can reduce medical expenditures among persons with AORC.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed2007

Utility loss and indirect costs following cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: the ASCOT health economic substudy.

This study assessed the loss of utility and indirect costs associated with first cardiovascular events. Data was collected (using EQ-5D) prospectively at 3, 6, and 12 months following an event in the Swedish part of the Anglo-Scandinavian cardiac outcomes trial (ASCOT), including patients with mild to moderate hypertension and additional risk factors. Sixty patients were eligible for analysis. An event was associated with a one-year utility loss of 0.075 (95% CI: 0.038-0.114). For a stroke, the reduction was 0.145 (CI: 0.059-0.249) and for acute coronary syndromes (myocardial infarction or unstable angina) the loss was 0.051 (-0.003 to 0.103). The utility at baseline was no different to the utility in a control group. The indirect cost over the first 12 months (2003 Swedish Kronor, SEK) was 90028 SEK (CI: 46027-146754), 9866 euro for patients in the workforce. These results are helpful in future economic evaluations of primary preventive measures in cardiovascular medicine.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed2007

Long-term absenteeism due to sickness in Sweden. How long does it take and what happens after?

In this paper, we analyze exits from long-term sickness spells in Sweden. Using data for more than 2,500 people, the aim is to analyze the transition to different states: return to work, full disability pension, partial disability pension, and other exits from the labor force. Given the complexity of the exit decision, which encompasses both the individual's choice, the medical evaluation and the decision of the insurance adjudicator, we consider the outcome as being the result of two aspects of the exit process: one that governs the duration of a spell prior to the decision to exit, and another that governs the type of exit. Therefore, the analysis is done in two steps: first, we analyze the duration of the sickness spells, and then we analyze the process that governs the type of exit. The results indicate that both individual characteristics and push factors, such as regional unemployment, are important for both components of the decision process.

Absenteeism↗