Free access

Research Article

15 September 2021

A real world cost-minimization analysis comparing the use of different endoscopic staplers in video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy procedures

Authors: Wei Gu, Tao Wang, Wenting Wang, Guixian Tong, Shuqing Wu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8836-7215, and Yi Han [email protected]Author Info & Affiliations

Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Volume 10, Number 14

https://doi.org/10.2217/cer-2020-0287

PDF OtherFormats

Abstract

Aim: China’s cost-containment measures increasingly focus solely on the prices of consumable medical supplies without taking a broader perspective on differences in features and overall costs. This study compared two types of endoscopic staplers in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy. Materials & methods: Electronic medical records for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery from 2016 to 2017 were collected from a hospital in Anhui province. Two cohorts were retroactively defined based on stapler type. Total costs were compared using a cost-minimization analysis model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: In the base case, the group using more expensive staplers achieved overall cost savings of about $300 per procedure. Sensitivity analysis confirmed this result in 86.5% of cases. Conclusion: A price-only supply selection strategy may have unintended cost consequences.

Supplementary Material

File (suppl_file.docx)

Download
18.34 KB

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

1.

Zhang X. Current status analysis of development of thoracic surgery in China. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi. 17(7), 518–522 (2014).

2.

Kuthe A, Haemmerle A, Ludwig K et al. Multicenter prospective evaluation of a new articulating 5-mm endoscopic linear stapler. Surg. Endosc. 30(5), 1883–1893 (2016).

3.

Akil A, Semik M, Freermann S et al. Use of a powered stapling system for minimally invasive lung volume reduction surgery: results of a prospective double-blind single-center randomized trial. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 67(3), 216–221 (2019).

4.

U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Surgical stapler and staples (2019). www.fda.gov/medical-devices/general-hospital-devices-and-supplies/surgical-staplers-and-staples

5.

Li L, Fu H. China’s health care system reform: progress and prospects. Int. J. Health Plann. Manage. 32(3), 240–253 (2017).

6.

Liu GG, Vortherms SA, Hong X. China’s health reform update. Annu. Rev. Public Health 38, 431–448 (2017).

• Gives a comprehensive review of policies implemented during China’s health reform. The three major areas of reform were health insurance, drug pricing and public hospitals. Several key tasks of public hospital reform aim to promote rational utilization of healthcare resources and control costs.

7.

Beijing: Central Government of the People's Republic of China. State Council notice regarding reform plan for regulation of high-cost medical consumable supplies (2019). www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2019-07/31/content_5417518.htm

8.

Beijing: National Healthcare Security Administration. Regarding application for national pilot program of diagnostic related groups (2018). www.nhsa.gov.cn/art/2018/12/10/art_37_851.html

9.

Tukey JW. Chapter 2 Schematic Summaries, section 2D Fences, and outside values. In: Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co, MA, USA (1970).

10.

Beijing: National Development and Reform Commission. Regarding standardization of healthcare service pricing and related issues (2012). www.ndrc.gov.cn/fzgggz/jggl/zcfg/201205/t20120510_478629.html

11.

Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Exchange rates (2019). https://data.oecd.org/conversion/exchange-rates.htm

12.

Welch, B. L. The generalization of Student’s problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 34 28–35, (1947).

13.

Best DJ, Rayner JCW. Welch's Approximate Solution for the Behrens–Fisher Problem. Technometrics 29(2), 205–210 (1987).

14.

Ruxton GD. The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student’s t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behav. Ecol. 17(4), 688–690 (2006).

15.

Fagerland MW, Sandvik L. Performance of five two-sample location tests for skewed distributions with unequal variances. Contemp. Clin. Trials 30(5), 490–496 (2009).

16.

Larmené-Beld KHM, Spronk JT-, Luttjeboer J, Taxis K, Postma MJ. A cost minimization analysis of ready-to-administer prefilled sterilized syringes in a Dutch hospital. Clin. Ther. 41(6), 1139–1150 (2019).

• This cost-minimization analysis compared the total costs of conventional syringe preparation and of using prefilled syringes. Despite additional equipment costs, the use of prefilled syringes yielded cost savings due to reduced risk of errors and contamination.

17.

Resnic FS, Arora N, Matheny M, Reynolds MR. A cost-minimization analysis of the angio-seal vascular closure device following percutaneous coronary intervention. Am. J. Cardiol. 99(6), 766–770 (2007).

18.

Hong JC, Yang GK, Delarmente BA et al. Cost-minimization study of the percutaneous approach to endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J. Vasc. Surg. 71(2), 444–449 (2020).

• This cost-minimization study used a decision tree to compare payer perspective costs of percutaneous versus surgical access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Although the percutaneous uses costly vascular closure devices, it was a cost-saving strategy compared with the surgical approach.

19.

Akazawa M, Konomura K, Shiroiwa T. Cost-minimization analysis of deep-brain stimulation using national database of Japanese health insurance claims. Neuromodulation 21(6), 548–552 (2018).

• This cost-minimization study compared rechargeable deep-brain stimulators with conventional devices, which require replacement surgery every 2–5 years. Although the rechargeable devices were more expensive, they incurred lower costs in the long run.

20.

Tarricone R, Torbica A, Drummond M. Challenges in the assessment of medical devices: the MedtecHTA Project. Health Econ. 26(Suppl. 1), 5–12 (2017).

21.

Drummond M, Griffin A, Tarricone R. Economic evaluation for devices and drugs–same or different? Value Health 12(4), 402–404 (2009).

22.

Ergina PL, Cook JA, Blazeby JM et al. Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation. Lancet 374(9695), 1097–1104 (2009).

23.

Boriani G, Biffi M, Martignani C et al. Expenditure and value for money: the challenge of implantable cardioverter defibrillators. QJM 102(5), 349–356 (2009).

24.

Beijing: Chinese Ministry of Health. 2010 Chinese health statistical digest (2011). www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles//business/htmlfiles/zwgkzt/ptjty/digest2010/index.htm1

25.

He Y, Dou G, Huang Q et al. Does the leading pharmaceutical reform in China really solve the issue of overly expensive healthcare services? Evidence from an empirical study. PLoS ONE 13(1), e0190320 (2018).

26.

Yang C, Shen Q, Cai W et al. Impact of the zero-markup drug policy on hospitalisation expenditure in western rural China: an interrupted time series analysis. Trop. Med. Int. Health 22(2), 180–186 (2017).

27.

Yi H, Miller G, Zhang L, Li S, Rozelle S. Intended and unintended consequences of China's zero markup drug policy. Health Aff. (Millwood) 34(8), 1391–1398 (2015).

•• This article found that China’s zero markup drug policy reduced drug revenue in township health centers, but doubled inpatient care, which seemed to be driven by supply.

28.

Fu H, Li L, Yip W. Intended and unintended impacts of price changes for drugs and medical services: evidence from China. Soc. Sci. Med. 211, 114–122 (2018).

•• This article found that China’s zero markup drug policy led to a reduction in drug expenditures, but also a rise in expenditures for medical services, ultimately resulting in no measurable change in total health expenditures.

|