An economic evaluation of a systems-based strategy to expedite surgical treatment of hip fractures

Christopher J. Dy, Kathryn McCollister, David Lubarsky, Joseph M. Lane

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A recent systematic review has indicated that mortality within the first year after hip fracture repair increases significantly if the time from hospital admission to surgery exceeds forty-eight hours. Further investigation has shown that avoidable, systems-based factors contribute substantially to delay in surgery. In this study, an economic evaluation was conducted to determine the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical scenario in which resources are allocated to expedite surgery so that it is performed within forty-eight hours after admission. Methods: We created a decision tree to tabulate incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two potential strategies. Several factors, including personnel cost, patient volume, percentage of patients receiving surgical treatment within forty-eight hours, andmortality associated with delayed surgery, were considered. One strategy focused solely on expediting preoperative evaluation by employing personnel to conduct the necessary diagnostic tests and a hospitalist physician to conduct the medical evaluation outside of regular hours. The second strategy added an on-call team(nurse, surgical technologist, and anesthesiologist) to staff an operating roomoutside of regular hours. Results: The evaluation-focused strategy was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2318 per quality-adjusted life year, and became cost-saving (a dominant therapeutic approach) if ≥93% of patients underwent expedited surgery, the hourly cost of retaining a diagnostic technologist on call was <$20.80, or <15% of the hospitalist's salary was funded by the strategy. The second strategy, which added an on-call surgical team, was also cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $43,153 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis revealed that this strategy remained cost-effective if the odds ratio of one-year mortality associated with delayed surgery was >1.28, ‡88% of patients underwent early surgery, or ≥339.9 patients with a hip fracture were treated annually. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that systems-based solutions to minimize operative delay, such as a dedicated on-call support team, can be cost-effective. Additionally, an evaluation-focused intervention can be cost-saving, depending on its success rate and associated personnel cost. Level of Evidence: Economic and decision analysis Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1326-1334
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series A
Volume93
Issue number14
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 20 2011

Fingerprint

Hip Fractures
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Therapeutics
Hospitalists
Decision Trees
Decision Support Techniques
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Nurses
Economics
Physicians
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

An economic evaluation of a systems-based strategy to expedite surgical treatment of hip fractures. / Dy, Christopher J.; McCollister, Kathryn; Lubarsky, David; Lane, Joseph M.

In: Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series A, Vol. 93, No. 14, 20.07.2011, p. 1326-1334.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{caa23b35321149fe9ee59b5a455e26a5,
title = "An economic evaluation of a systems-based strategy to expedite surgical treatment of hip fractures",
abstract = "Background: A recent systematic review has indicated that mortality within the first year after hip fracture repair increases significantly if the time from hospital admission to surgery exceeds forty-eight hours. Further investigation has shown that avoidable, systems-based factors contribute substantially to delay in surgery. In this study, an economic evaluation was conducted to determine the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical scenario in which resources are allocated to expedite surgery so that it is performed within forty-eight hours after admission. Methods: We created a decision tree to tabulate incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two potential strategies. Several factors, including personnel cost, patient volume, percentage of patients receiving surgical treatment within forty-eight hours, andmortality associated with delayed surgery, were considered. One strategy focused solely on expediting preoperative evaluation by employing personnel to conduct the necessary diagnostic tests and a hospitalist physician to conduct the medical evaluation outside of regular hours. The second strategy added an on-call team(nurse, surgical technologist, and anesthesiologist) to staff an operating roomoutside of regular hours. Results: The evaluation-focused strategy was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2318 per quality-adjusted life year, and became cost-saving (a dominant therapeutic approach) if ≥93{\%} of patients underwent expedited surgery, the hourly cost of retaining a diagnostic technologist on call was <$20.80, or <15{\%} of the hospitalist's salary was funded by the strategy. The second strategy, which added an on-call surgical team, was also cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $43,153 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis revealed that this strategy remained cost-effective if the odds ratio of one-year mortality associated with delayed surgery was >1.28, ‡88{\%} of patients underwent early surgery, or ≥339.9 patients with a hip fracture were treated annually. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that systems-based solutions to minimize operative delay, such as a dedicated on-call support team, can be cost-effective. Additionally, an evaluation-focused intervention can be cost-saving, depending on its success rate and associated personnel cost. Level of Evidence: Economic and decision analysis Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.",
author = "Dy, {Christopher J.} and Kathryn McCollister and David Lubarsky and Lane, {Joseph M.}",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
day = "20",
doi = "10.2106/JBJS.I.01132",
language = "English",
volume = "93",
pages = "1326--1334",
journal = "Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume",
issn = "0021-9355",
publisher = "Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Inc.",
number = "14",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An economic evaluation of a systems-based strategy to expedite surgical treatment of hip fractures

AU - Dy, Christopher J.

AU - McCollister, Kathryn

AU - Lubarsky, David

AU - Lane, Joseph M.

PY - 2011/7/20

Y1 - 2011/7/20

N2 - Background: A recent systematic review has indicated that mortality within the first year after hip fracture repair increases significantly if the time from hospital admission to surgery exceeds forty-eight hours. Further investigation has shown that avoidable, systems-based factors contribute substantially to delay in surgery. In this study, an economic evaluation was conducted to determine the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical scenario in which resources are allocated to expedite surgery so that it is performed within forty-eight hours after admission. Methods: We created a decision tree to tabulate incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two potential strategies. Several factors, including personnel cost, patient volume, percentage of patients receiving surgical treatment within forty-eight hours, andmortality associated with delayed surgery, were considered. One strategy focused solely on expediting preoperative evaluation by employing personnel to conduct the necessary diagnostic tests and a hospitalist physician to conduct the medical evaluation outside of regular hours. The second strategy added an on-call team(nurse, surgical technologist, and anesthesiologist) to staff an operating roomoutside of regular hours. Results: The evaluation-focused strategy was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2318 per quality-adjusted life year, and became cost-saving (a dominant therapeutic approach) if ≥93% of patients underwent expedited surgery, the hourly cost of retaining a diagnostic technologist on call was <$20.80, or <15% of the hospitalist's salary was funded by the strategy. The second strategy, which added an on-call surgical team, was also cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $43,153 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis revealed that this strategy remained cost-effective if the odds ratio of one-year mortality associated with delayed surgery was >1.28, ‡88% of patients underwent early surgery, or ≥339.9 patients with a hip fracture were treated annually. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that systems-based solutions to minimize operative delay, such as a dedicated on-call support team, can be cost-effective. Additionally, an evaluation-focused intervention can be cost-saving, depending on its success rate and associated personnel cost. Level of Evidence: Economic and decision analysis Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

AB - Background: A recent systematic review has indicated that mortality within the first year after hip fracture repair increases significantly if the time from hospital admission to surgery exceeds forty-eight hours. Further investigation has shown that avoidable, systems-based factors contribute substantially to delay in surgery. In this study, an economic evaluation was conducted to determine the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical scenario in which resources are allocated to expedite surgery so that it is performed within forty-eight hours after admission. Methods: We created a decision tree to tabulate incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two potential strategies. Several factors, including personnel cost, patient volume, percentage of patients receiving surgical treatment within forty-eight hours, andmortality associated with delayed surgery, were considered. One strategy focused solely on expediting preoperative evaluation by employing personnel to conduct the necessary diagnostic tests and a hospitalist physician to conduct the medical evaluation outside of regular hours. The second strategy added an on-call team(nurse, surgical technologist, and anesthesiologist) to staff an operating roomoutside of regular hours. Results: The evaluation-focused strategy was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2318 per quality-adjusted life year, and became cost-saving (a dominant therapeutic approach) if ≥93% of patients underwent expedited surgery, the hourly cost of retaining a diagnostic technologist on call was <$20.80, or <15% of the hospitalist's salary was funded by the strategy. The second strategy, which added an on-call surgical team, was also cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $43,153 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis revealed that this strategy remained cost-effective if the odds ratio of one-year mortality associated with delayed surgery was >1.28, ‡88% of patients underwent early surgery, or ≥339.9 patients with a hip fracture were treated annually. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that systems-based solutions to minimize operative delay, such as a dedicated on-call support team, can be cost-effective. Additionally, an evaluation-focused intervention can be cost-saving, depending on its success rate and associated personnel cost. Level of Evidence: Economic and decision analysis Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052853795&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052853795&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2106/JBJS.I.01132

DO - 10.2106/JBJS.I.01132

M3 - Article

C2 - 21792499

AN - SCOPUS:80052853795

VL - 93

SP - 1326

EP - 1334

JO - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume

JF - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume

SN - 0021-9355

IS - 14

ER -