Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Surgical ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Surgical Research
Article . 2012 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
versions View all 4 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy

Authors: Carrington EV; Hall NJ; Pacilli M; Drake DP; Curry JI; Kiely EM; DE COPPI, PAOLO; +2 Authors

Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy

Abstract

Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis can be corrected by either open (OP) or laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (LP). LP may provide clinical benefits of reduced time to postoperative full feeds and reduced postoperative inpatient stay, but the cost effectiveness is not known. Our aim was to compare the cost effectiveness of laparoscopic and open pyloromyotomy.OP and LP were compared in a multicenter randomized double-blind controlled trial, for which the primary outcomes were time to full feeds and time to discharge. In order to undertake a detailed cost analysis, we assigned costs, calculated on an individual patient basis, to laboratory costs, imaging, medical staff, medication, ward, operative, and outpatient appointments for 74 patients recruited from one of the participating centers. Data (mean ± SEM) were compared using linear regression analysis, adjusting for the minimization criteria used in the trial.Operation costs were similar between the two groups ($3,276 ± $244 LP versus $3,535 ± $152 OP). A shorter time to full feeds and shorter hospital stay in LP versus OP patients resulted in a highly significant difference in ward costs ($2,650 ± $126 LP versus $3,398 ± $126 OP; P = .001) and a small difference in other costs. Overall, LP patients were $1,263 (95% confidence interval $395-$2,130; P = .005) less expensive to treat than OP patients. Sensitivity analyses of laparoscopic hardware usage and of incomplete pyloromyotomy indicated that LP was consistently less expensive than OP.LP is a cost-effective alternative to OP as it delivers improved clinical outcome at a lower price.

Keywords

Outpatient Clinics, Hospital, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Infant, Newborn, 610, Infant, Pyloric Stenosis, Hypertrophic, Length of Stay, Laboratories, Hospital, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Humans, Laparoscopy, Prospective Studies, Analgesia, Hospital Costs

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    33
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
33
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!