Laura S M Derks, Digna M A Kamalski, Hans G X M Thomeer, Wilko Grolman, Robert J Stokroos, Inge Wegner
{"title":"The Cost Evaluation of Day-Case Compared With Inpatient Stapes Surgery for Otosclerosis: Subanalysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Laura S M Derks, Digna M A Kamalski, Hans G X M Thomeer, Wilko Grolman, Robert J Stokroos, Inge Wegner","doi":"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the difference in overall, hospital, and out-of-hospital cost difference of day-case stapes surgery, compared with inpatient stapes surgery, while maintaining equal hearing outcomes and quality of life (QoL).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A single-center, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 112 adult patients planned for primary or revision stapes surgery for clinically suspected otosclerosis were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. An evaluation was performed of the difference in total health care-related costs (hospital and out-of-hospital costs) from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of 1 year. Audiometric measurements included pure-tone audiometric measurements and speech audiometry measured at 2 months and 1 year postoperatively. QoL was assessed at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively, using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 109 cases (100 patients) were analyzed due to three dropouts. The total health care-related costs were €16,586 in the inpatient group (n = 54) and €16,904 in the day-case group (n = 55). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 0.9 days (mean costs of €854) in the inpatient group and 0.5 days (mean costs of €561) in the day-case group (both mean differences statistically significant), with a crossover rate from day-case to the inpatient group of 36% (n = 20) and a crossover rate from inpatient to the day-case group of 11% (n = 6). There were no differences in postoperative complications and objective hearing outcomes. Besides an increased number (0.2) of postoperative telephone consultations in the day-case group, there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out-of-hospital costs or visits. The QoL showed no statistically significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A day-case approach in primary or revision stapes surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related hospital and out-of-hospital costs compared with an inpatient approach. It also does not affect the surgical outcome (objective audiometric measurements and complication rate), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out-of-hospital visits).Level of evidence: 1.</p>","PeriodicalId":19732,"journal":{"name":"Otology & Neurotology","volume":" ","pages":"39-47"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otology & Neurotology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the difference in overall, hospital, and out-of-hospital cost difference of day-case stapes surgery, compared with inpatient stapes surgery, while maintaining equal hearing outcomes and quality of life (QoL).
Study design: A single-center, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center.
Methods: A total of 112 adult patients planned for primary or revision stapes surgery for clinically suspected otosclerosis were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group. An evaluation was performed of the difference in total health care-related costs (hospital and out-of-hospital costs) from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of 1 year. Audiometric measurements included pure-tone audiometric measurements and speech audiometry measured at 2 months and 1 year postoperatively. QoL was assessed at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively, using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires.
Results: A total of 109 cases (100 patients) were analyzed due to three dropouts. The total health care-related costs were €16,586 in the inpatient group (n = 54) and €16,904 in the day-case group (n = 55). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 0.9 days (mean costs of €854) in the inpatient group and 0.5 days (mean costs of €561) in the day-case group (both mean differences statistically significant), with a crossover rate from day-case to the inpatient group of 36% (n = 20) and a crossover rate from inpatient to the day-case group of 11% (n = 6). There were no differences in postoperative complications and objective hearing outcomes. Besides an increased number (0.2) of postoperative telephone consultations in the day-case group, there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out-of-hospital costs or visits. The QoL showed no statistically significant differences.
Conclusion: A day-case approach in primary or revision stapes surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related hospital and out-of-hospital costs compared with an inpatient approach. It also does not affect the surgical outcome (objective audiometric measurements and complication rate), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out-of-hospital visits).Level of evidence: 1.
期刊介绍:
Otology & Neurotology publishes original articles relating to both clinical and basic science aspects of otology, neurotology, and cranial base surgery. As the foremost journal in its field, it has become the favored place for publishing the best of new science relating to the human ear and its diseases. The broadly international character of its contributing authors, editorial board, and readership provides the Journal its decidedly global perspective.