| Title |
Cost–Benefit Analysis of the Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Liver Surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-016-3582-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gaëtan‐Romain Joliat, Ismaïl Labgaa, Martin Hübner, Catherine Blanc, Anne‐Claude Griesser, Markus Schäfer, Nicolas Demartines |
| Abstract |
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to ease the postoperative recovery and improve clinical outcomes for various surgery types. ERAS cost-effectiveness was demonstrated for colorectal surgery but not for liver surgery. The present study aim was to analyze the implementation costs and benefits of a specific ERAS program in liver surgery. A dedicated ERAS protocol for liver surgery was implemented in our department in July 2013. The subsequent year all consecutive patients undergoing liver surgery were treated according to this protocol (ERAS group). They were compared in terms of real in-hospital costs with a patient series before ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS group). Mean costs per patient were compared with a bootstrap T test. A cost-minimization analysis was performed. Seventy-four ERAS patients were compared with 100 pre-ERAS patients. There were no significant pre- and intraoperative differences between the two groups, except for the laparoscopy number (n = 18 ERAS, n = 9 pre-ERAS, p = 0.010). Overall postoperative complications were observed in 36 (49 %) and 64 patients (64 %) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups, respectively (p = 0.046). The median length of stay was significantly shorter for the ERAS group (8 vs. 10 days, p = 0.006). The total mean costs per patient were €38,726 and €42,356 for ERAS and pre-ERAS (p = 0.467). The cost-minimization analysis showed a total mean cost reduction of €3080 per patient after ERAS implementation. ERAS implementation for liver surgery induced a non-significant decrease in cost compared to standard care. Significant decreased complication rate and hospital stay were observed in the ERAS group. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 52% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,332,117
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,799
of 4,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,530
of 343,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#68
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.