A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Colorectal Surgery

被引:88
作者
Lee, Lawrence [1 ]
Li, Chao [1 ]
Landry, Tara [2 ]
Latimer, Eric [3 ,4 ]
Carli, Franco [5 ]
Fried, Gerald M. [1 ]
Feldman, Liane S. [1 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Ctr Hlth, Steinberg Bernstein Ctr Minimally Invas Surg & In, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Ctr Hlth, Montreal Gen Hosp, Med Lib, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
[3] McGill Univ, Dept Epidemiol Biostat & Occupat Hlth, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
[4] Douglas Inst, Dept Psychiat, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[5] McGill Univ, Ctr Hlth, Dept Anesthesia, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
关键词
colorectal surgery; cost-effectiveness; enhanced recovery pathway; systematic review; TRACK MULTIMODAL MANAGEMENT; LENGTH-OF-STAY; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; CARE PATHWAY; QUALITY; PROGRAM; HEALTH; ERAS; IMPLEMENTATION;
D O I
10.1097/SLA.0b013e318295fef8
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To perform a systematic review of economic evaluations of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) for colorectal surgery. Background: Although there is extensive literature investigating the clinical effectiveness of ERP, little is known regarding its cost-effectiveness. Methods: A systematic literature search identified all relevant articles published between 1997 and 2012 that performed an economic evaluation of ERP for colorectal surgery. Studies were included only if their ERP included all 5 of the key components (patient information, preservation of GI function, minimization of organ dysfunction, active pain control, and promotion of patient autonomy). Quality assessment was performed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria instrument (scored 0-19; high quality 12). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated if sufficient data were provided, using difference in length of stay and overall complication rates as effectiveness measures. Results: Of a total of 263 unique records identified (253 from databases and 10 from other sources), 10 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included for full qualitative synthesis. Overall quality was poor (mean quality 7.8). Eight reported lower costs for ERP. The majority (8 of 10) of studies were performed from an institutional perspective and therefore did not include costs related to changes in productivity and other indirect costs (eg, caregiver burden). Five studies provided enough information to calculate ICERs, of which ERP was dominant (less costly and more effective) in all cases for reduction in length of stay and was dominant or potentially cost-effective in 4 and questionable (no difference in costs nor effectiveness) in 1 for reduction in overall complications. Conclusions: The quality of the current evidence is limited but tends to support the cost-effectiveness of ERP. There is need for well-designed trials to determine the cost-effectiveness of ERP from both the institutional and societal perspectives.
引用
收藏
页码:670 / 676
页数:7
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   Compliance with enhanced recovery programmes in elective colorectal surgery [J].
Ahmed, J. ;
Khan, S. ;
Gatt, M. ;
Kallam, R. ;
MacFie, J. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2010, 97 (05) :754-758
[2]   Enhanced Recovery After Colon Surgery in a Community Hospital System [J].
Archibald, Lyle H. ;
Ott, Mark J. ;
Gale, Craig M. ;
Zhang, Jie ;
Peters, Matthew S. ;
Stroud, Gary K. .
DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2011, 54 (07) :840-845
[3]   An Improved Set of Standards for Finding Cost for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis [J].
Barnett, Paul G. .
MEDICAL CARE, 2009, 47 (07) :S82-S88
[4]   Implementation of laparoscopic colectomy with fast-track care in an academic medical center: benefits of a fully ascended learning curve and specialty expertise [J].
Bosio, Raul M. ;
Smith, Bryan M. ;
Aybar, Pablo Serrano ;
Senagore, Anthony J. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2007, 193 (03) :413-415
[5]  
Briggs A, 1998, J Health Serv Res Policy, V3, P233
[6]   Excess Costs Attributable to Postoperative Complications [J].
Carey, Kathleen ;
Stefos, Theodore ;
Zhao, Shibei ;
Borzecki, Ann M. ;
Rosen, Amy K. .
MEDICAL CARE RESEARCH AND REVIEW, 2011, 68 (04) :490-503
[7]   Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies [J].
Chiou, CF ;
Hay, JW ;
Wallace, JF ;
Bloom, BS ;
Neumann, PJ ;
Sullivan, SD ;
Yu, HT ;
Keeler, EB ;
Henning, JM ;
Ofman, JJ .
MEDICAL CARE, 2003, 41 (01) :32-44
[8]   Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ [J].
Drummond, MF ;
Jefferson, TO .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1996, 313 (7052) :275-283
[9]  
Drummond MF, 2005, Methods for The Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes
[10]   Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria [J].
Evers, S ;
Goossens, M ;
de Vet, H ;
van Tulder, M ;
Ament, A .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2005, 21 (02) :240-245