Background As the population ages, surgical intervention for degenerative spine conditions is increasing, and this causes a commiserate increase in healthcare expenditures associated with these procedures. Little research has been done on the effect of early-week versus later-week surgeries on patient outcomes, cost, and length of stay (LOS) in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. The purpose of this study is to compare LOS, patient outcomes, and hospital costs between patients having surgery early in the week and later in the week. Methods A retrospective review of 771 patients undergoing a one-, two-, or three-level lumbar fusion from December 2020 to December 2023 at a single institution was performed. Demographics, surgical details, postoperative outcomes and cost were compared between patients who had surgery on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, to those having surgery Thursday or Friday. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare the groups. Results There were no differences in age, sex, BMI, race, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores, number of operative levels or inpatient/outpatient status between early- and late-week surgeries. Postoperatively the only significant difference was cost, late-week surgeries were, on average, $3,697 more expensive than early-week surgeries ($26,506 vs. $22,809; p<0.001). On multivariate analysis late-week surgeries were 2.47 times more likely to have a non-home discharge (OR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.24 to 4.95; p=0.010) and 2.19 times more likely to have a 30-day readmission (OR: 2.19, 95% CI:1.01 to 4.74; p=0.044) Additionally, late-week surgeries were $2,041.55 (β:2,041.55, 95% CI: 804.72 to 3,278.38; p=0.001) more expensive than early-week surgeries. Conclusions At our institution, patients undergoing one- to three-level lumbar fusion surgery on Thursday or Friday had a higher risk of non-home discharge, 30-day readmission, and incurred higher cost than those having early-week surgery. Further research is needed to elucidate the reasons for these findings and to evaluate interventions aimed at improving outcomes for patients undergoing surgery later in the week.

BACKGROUND: The Value-Based Health Care (VBHC) model of care provides insights into patient characteristics, outcomes, and costs of care delivery that help clinicians counsel patients. This study compares the allocation and value of curative oncological treatment in frail and fit older patients with esophageal cancer in a dedicated VBHC pathway.
METHODS: Data was collected from patients with primary esophageal cancer without distant metastases, aged 70 years or older, and treated at a Dutch tertiary care hospital between 2015 and 2019. Geriatric assessment (GA) was performed. Outcomes included treatment discontinuation, mortality, quality of life (QoL), and physical functioning over a one-year period. Direct hospital costs were estimated using activity-based costing.
RESULTS: In this study, 89 patients were included with mean age 75 years. Of 56 patients completing GA, 19 were classified as frail and 37 as fit. For frail patients, the treatment plan was chemoradiotherapy and surgery (CRT&S) in 68% (13/19) and definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) in 32% (6/19); for fit patients, CRT&S in 84% (31/37) and dCRT in 16% (6/37). Frail patients discontinued chemotherapy more often than fit patients (26% (5/19) vs 11% (4/37), p = 0.03) and reported lower QoL after six months (mean 0.58 [standard deviation (SD) 0.35] vs 0.88 [0.25], p < 0.05). After one year, 11% of frail and 30% of fit patients reported no decline in physical functioning and QoL and survived. Frail and fit patients had comparable mean direct hospital costs (€24 K [SD €13 K] vs €23 K [SD €8 K], p = 0.82).
CONCLUSIONS: The value of curative oncological treatment was lower for frail than for fit patients because of slightly worse outcomes and comparable costs. The utility of the VBHC model of care depends on the availability of sufficient data. Real-world evidence in VBHC can be used to inform treatment decisions and optimization in future patients by sharing results and monitoring performance over time.
BACKGROUND: The study was retrospectively registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), trial number NL8107 (date of registration: 22-10-2019).

Robotic surgery has been increasingly adopted in various surgical fields, but the cost-effectiveness of this technology remains controversial due to its high cost and limited improvements in clinical outcomes. This study aims to explore the health economic implications of robotic pancreatic surgery, to investigate its impact on hospitalization costs and consumption of various medical resources. Data of patients who underwent pancreatic surgery at our institution were collected and divided into robotic and traditional groups. Statistical analyses of hospitalization costs, length of stay, costs across different service categories, and subgroup cost analyses based on age, BMI class, and procedure received were performed using t tests and linear regression. Although the total hospitalization cost for the robotic group was significantly higher than that for the traditional group, there was a notable reduction in the cost of medical consumables. The reduction was more prominent among elderly patients, obese patients, and those undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, which could be attributed to the technological advantages of the robotic surgery platform that largely facilitate blood control, tissue protection, and suturing. The study concluded that despite higher overall costs, robotic pancreatic surgery offers significant savings in medical consumables, particularly benefiting certain patient subgroups. The findings provide valuable insights into the economic viability of robotic surgery, supporting its adoption from a health economics perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Current policy responses to COVID-19 disruption and care backlogs suggest potential changes to the location and structure of hospital healthcare supply. However, few studies investigating the cost effects of hospital reorganisation consider changes in the mix of outputs or test for the existence of economies of scope in hospital healthcare. Attempts to create dedicated hubs to address healthcare demand backlogs could have unintended adverse cost effects where these are provided outside existing hospital arrangements. To evaluate this, we investigate the existence and size of economies of scope in English hospital healthcare.
METHODS: We use cost and activity data from the English NHS, linked to aggregated staff wage information and information taken from hospital financial statements. Cost and activity data was obtained from NHS England\'s Costing Publications. Wage data was extracted from the NHS\'s Electronic Staff Record via the NHS England Workforce Statistics Team, and published hospital financial accounts were aggregated and linked together at the organisation level.
RESULTS: General Surgery exhibited positive economies of scope when provided alongside other healthcare, as to a lesser extent did General Medicine and Obstetric/Gynaecology healthcare. There was little evidence for economies of scope in Diagnostic and Pathology services, Orthopaedics, or Emergency Care. Few (2/28) output cross-products (cost complementarities) were statistically significant, but Baumol\'s wider definition of scope economies demonstrates that scope economies are present in some specialties.
CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers seeking to maximise the amount of healthcare provided and minimise the costs of doing so may wish to consider retaining General Surgery, General Medicine and Obstetric/Gynaecology healthcare supply alongside the provision of other clinical specialties. There is limited evidence that reconfiguring supply by centralizing other specialty groups into fewer providers would increase costs.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the most prevalent type of cardiovascular disease in Iran. This study aims to investigate the estimation and determinants of direct hospitalisation cost for patients with CHD in Iranian hospitals.
METHODS: We identified patients with CHD in Iran in 2019-2020. Data were gathered from the Iran Health Insurance Organisation information systems and the Ministry of Health and Medical Education. This was a cross-sectional prevalence-based study. Generalised linear models were used to find the determinants of hospitalisation cost for patients with CHD. A total of 86 834 patients suffering from CHD were studied.
RESULTS: Mean hospitalisation cost per CHD patient was US$382.90±US$500.72 while the mean daily hospitalisation cost per CHD patient was US$89.71±US$89.99. In-hospital mortality of CHD was 2.52%. Hospitalisation accommodation and medications had the highest share of hospitalisation costs (25.59% and 22.63%, respectively). Men spent 1.12 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.13) times more on hospitalisation costs compared with women, and individuals aged 60 to 69 had hospitalisation costs 1.04 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.06) times higher than those in the 0-49 age range. Patients insured by the Iranian Fund have significantly higher costs 1.17 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.19) than the Rural fund. Hospitalisation costs for patients with CHD who received surgery and angiography were significantly 2.36 (95% CI 2.30 to 2.43) times higher than for patients who did not undergo surgery and angiography.
CONCLUSIONS: Applying CHD prevention strategies for men and the middle-aged population (50-70 years) is strongly recommended. Prudent use and prescribing of medications will be helpful to reduce hospitalisation cost.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive stroke centres across England have developed investment proposals, showing the estimated increases in mechanical thrombectomy (MT) treatment volume that would justify extending the standard hours to a 24/7 service provision. These investment proposals have been developed taking a financial accounting perspective, that is by considering the financial revenues from tariff income. However, given the pressure put on local health authorities to provide value for money services, an affordability question emerges. That is, at what additional MT treatment volume the additional treatment costs are offset by the additional health economic benefits, that is quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and societal cost savings, generated by administering MT compared to standard care.
METHODS: A break-even analysis was conducted to identify the additional MT treatment volume required. The incremental hospital-related costs associated with the 24/7 MT extension were estimated using information and parameters from four relevant business cases. The additional societal cost savings and health benefits were estimated by adapting a previously developed Markov chain-based model.
RESULTS: The additional hospital-related annual costs for extending MT to a 24/7 service were estimated at a mean of £3,756,818 (range £1,847,387 to £5,092,788). On average, 750 (range 246 to 1,571) additional eligible stroke patients are required to be treated with MT yearly for the proposed 24/7 service extension to be affordable from a health economic perspective. Overall, the additional facility and equipment costs associated with the 24/7 extension would affect this estimate by 20%.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the ongoing debate regarding the optimal levels of MT treatment required for a 24/7 extension and respective changes in hospital organisational activities. They also highlight a need for a regional-level coordination between local authorities and hospital administrations to ensure equity provision in that stroke patients can benefit from MT and that the optimal MT treatment volume is reached. Future studies should contemplate reproducing the presented analysis for different health service provision settings and decision making contexts.

People approaching end of life account disproportionately for health care costs, and the majority of these costs accrue in hospitals. The economic evidence base to improve value of care to this population is thin. Natural experiment methods may be helpful in bridging evidence gaps with credible causal estimates from routine data, but these methods have seldom been applied in this field. This study aimed to evaluate the association between timely palliative care consultation and length of stay for adults with serious illness admitted to acute hospital in Ireland.
In primary analysis we evaluated if timely palliative care receipt following emergency hospital inpatient admission impacted length of stay (LOS); in secondary analysis we verified if palliative medicine service (PMS) implementation co-occurred with any changes in in-hospital mortality, and we estimated cost differences associated with any change in LOS. This was a secondary analysis on routinely collected data for acute admissions to public hospitals in Ireland. We used difference-in-differences analysis to exploit the staggered implementation of PMS teams at acute public hospitals in Ireland between 2010 and 2015. We identified palliative care receipt following PMS implementation using ICD-10 codes, and we matched admissions involving a palliative care interaction to admissions in years prior to PMS implementation using propensity score weights.
Our primary analytic sample included 4,314 observations, of whom 608 (14%) received timely palliative care. We estimated that the intervention reduced LOS by nearly two days, with an estimated associated saving per admission of €1,820. These analyses were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses on regression specification, weighting strategy and site selection. Proportion of admissions ending in death did not change following PMS implementation.
Prompt interaction between suitable patients and palliative care can improve the quality and efficiency of care to this population. Many patients receive palliative care later in the hospital stay, which does not yield cost-savings. Future studies can extend and strengthen our approach with better data, as well as using different methods to understand how to trigger palliative care early in a hospital admission and realise available gains.

UNASSIGNED: Twin pregnancies are associated with higher risks of adverse neonatal outcomes compared to singleton pregnancies. The choice of delivery mode, when twin A presents cephalic, remains a subject of debate. In low- and middle-income countries, where healthcare resources are limited, the decision on the mode of delivery is even more critical.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the neonatal outcomes and the hospital costs of planned vaginal delivery compared to cesarean section (CS) in twin pregnancies with twin A presenting cephalic at Tenwek Hospital, Kenya.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from all twin deliveries at Tenwek Hospital, Kenya from, April 1, 2017, to March 30, 2023. Maternal data, mode of delivery, and neonatal data were collected from delivery logs, electronic health records, and neonatal records. Neonatal outcomes were a composite of either Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity, and Respiration score less than seven at 5 minutes, neonatal intensive care unit admission, resuscitation, birth trauma, or neonatal complications, including death before discharge from the hospital. A logistic regression model was created to assess the impact of the planned mode of delivery on neonatal outcomes, controlling for antenatal care clinic visits, noncephalic presentation of twin B, and birth weight category.
UNASSIGNED: The study included 177 twin deliveries: 129 (72.9%) were planned as vaginal deliveries and 48 (27.1%) were planned for CS. Among the planned vaginal deliveries, 66 (51.2%) experienced adverse outcomes, compared to 14 (29.2%) in the CS group (P=.009). Logistic regression showed that the odds of adverse outcomes were 0.35 times lower in the CS group compared to the planned vaginal delivery group (95% CI: 0.15-0.83; P=.017). The average total hospital costs for planned vaginal delivery were 104,608 Kenya Shillings (standard deviation 111,761) compared to 100,708 Kenya Shillings (standard deviation 75,468) for CS (P=.82).
UNASSIGNED: Planned cesarean deliveries in twin pregnancies with twin A presenting cephalic at Tenwek Hospital were associated with fewer adverse neonatal outcomes compared to planned vaginal deliveries. There was no significant difference in hospital costs. These findings raise the question of the safest mode of delivery for patients in a resource-constrained setting.

Adverse events (AEs) are a significant concern for healthcare systems. However, it is difficult to evaluate their influence because of the complexity of various medical services. This study aimed to assess the influence of AEs on the outcomes of hospitalized patients using a diagnosis-related group (DRG) database. We conducted a case-control study of hospitalized patients at a multi-district tertiary hospital with 2200 beds in China, using data from a DRG database. An AE refers to an unintended physical injury caused or contributed to by medical care that requires additional hospitalization, monitoring, treatment, or even death. Relative weight (RW), a specific indicator of DRG, was used to measure the difficulty of diagnosis and treatment, disease severity, and medical resources utilized. The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs. The secondary outcome was discharge to home. This study applied DRG-based matching, Hodges-Lehmann estimate, regression analysis, and subgroup analysis to evaluate the influence of AEs on outcomes. Two sensitivity analyses by excluding short LOS and changing adjustment factors were performed to assess the robustness of the results. We identified 2690 hospitalized patients who had been divided into 329 DRGs, including 1345 patients who experienced AEs (case group) and 1345 DRG-matched normal controls. The Hodges-Lehmann estimate and generalized linear regression analysis showed AEs led to prolonged LOS (unadjusted difference, 7 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6-8 days; adjusted difference, 8.31 days, 95% CI 7.16-9.52 days) and excess hospitalization costs (unadjusted difference, $2186.40, 95% CI: $1836.87-$2559.16; adjusted difference, $2822.67, 95% CI: $2351.25-$3334.88). Logistic regression analysis showed AEs were associated with lower odds of discharge to home (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% CI 0.54-0.82; adjusted OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93). The subgroup analyses showed that the results for each subgroup were largely consistent. LOS and hospitalization costs increased significantly after AEs in complex diseases (RW ≥ 2) and in relation to high degrees of harm subgroups (moderate harm and above groups). Similar results were obtained in sensitivity analyses. The burden of AEs, especially those related to complex diseases and severe harm, is significant in China. The DRG database serves as a valuable source of information that can be utilized for the evaluation and management of AEs.

BACKGROUND: The Diagnosis-Intervention Packet (DIP) payment system, initiated by China\'s National Healthcare Security Administration, is designed to enhance healthcare efficiency and manage rising healthcare costs. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the DIP payment reform on inpatient care in a specialized obstetrics and gynecology hospital, with a focus on its implications for various patient groups.
METHODS: To assess the DIP policy\'s effects, we employed the Difference-in-Differences (DID) approach. This method was used to analyze changes in total hospital costs and Length of Stay (LOS) across different patient groups, particularly within select DIP categories. The study involved a comprehensive examination of the DIP policy\'s influence pre- and post-implementation.
RESULTS: Our findings indicate that the implementation of the DIP policy led to a significant increase in both total costs and LOS for the insured group relative to the self-paying group. The study further identified variations within DIP groups both before and after the reform. In-depth analysis of specific disease groups revealed that the insured group experienced notably higher total costs and LOS compared to the self-paying group.
CONCLUSIONS: The DIP reform has led to several challenges, including upcoding and diagnostic ambiguity, because of the pursuit of higher reimbursements. These findings underscore the necessity for continuous improvement of the DIP payment system to effectively tackle these challenges and optimize healthcare delivery and cost management.