Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/902
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCostello, Anthony-
dc.contributor.authorMoon, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorMurphy, Declan-
dc.contributor.authorLawrentschuk, Nathan-
dc.contributor.authorHeriot, Alexander-
dc.contributor.otherBasto, Marni-
dc.contributor.otherSathianathen, Niranjan-
dc.contributor.otherTe Marvelde, Luc-
dc.contributor.otherRyan, Shane-
dc.contributor.otherGoad, Jeremy-
dc.contributor.otherButler, Jim-
dc.date2015-10-
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-22T02:40:10Z-
dc.date.available2016-11-22T02:40:10Z-
dc.date.issued2016-06-
dc.identifier.citationBJU Int. 2016 Jun;117(6):930-9.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1464-410Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11434/902-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: To compare patterns of care and peri-operative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with other surgical approaches, and to create an economic model to assess the viability of RARP in the public case-mix funding system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all radical prostatectomies (RPs) performed for localized prostate cancer in Victoria, Australia, from the Victorian Admitted Episode Dataset, a large administrative database that records all hospital inpatient episodes in Victoria. The first database, covering the period from July 2010 to April 2013 (n = 5 130), was used to compare length of hospital stay (LOS) and blood transfusion rates between surgical approaches. This was subsequently integrated into an economic model. A second database (n = 5 581) was extracted to cover the period between July 2010 and June 2013, three full financial years, to depict patterns of care and make future predictions for the 2014-2015 financial year, and to perform a hospital volume analysis. We then created an economic model to evaluate the incremental cost of RARP vs open RP (ORP) and laparoscopic RP (LRP), incorporating the cost-offset from differences in LOS and blood transfusion rate. The economic model constructs estimates of the diagnosis-related group (DRG) costs of ORP and LRP, adds the gross cost of the surgical robot (capital, consumables, maintenance and repairs), and manipulates these DRG costs to obtain a DRG cost per day, which can be used to estimate the cost-offset associated with RARP in comparison with ORP and LRP. Economic modelling was performed around a base-case scenario, assuming a 7-year robot lifespan and 124 RARPs performed per financial year. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed for the four-arm da Vinci SHD, Si and Si dual surgical systems (Intuitive Surgical Ltd, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). RESULTS: We identified 5 581 patients who underwent RP in 20 hospitals in Victoria with an open, laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgical approach in the public and private sector. The majority of RPs (4 233, 75.8%), in Victoria were performed in the private sector, with an overall 11.5% decrease in the total number of RPs performed over the 3-year study period. In the most recent financial year, 820 (47%), 765 (44%) and 173 patients (10%) underwent RARP, ORP and LRP, respectively. In the same timeframe, RARP accounted for 26 and 53% of all RPs in the public and private sector, respectively. Public hospitals in Victoria perform a median number of 14 RPs per year and 40% of hospitals perform <10 RPs per year. In the public system, RARP was associated with a mean (±sd) LOS of 1.4 (±1.3) days compared with 3.6 (±2.7) days for LRP and 4.8 (±3.5) days for ORP (P < 0.001). The mean blood transfusion rates were 0, 6 and 15% for RARP, LRP and ORP, respectively (P < 0.001). The incremental cost per RARP case compared with ORP and LRP was A$442 and A$2 092, respectively, for the da Vinci S model, A$1 933 and A$3 583, respectively, for the da Vinci Si model and A$3 548 and A$5 198, respectively for the da Vinci Si dual. RARP can become cost-equivalent with ORP where ~140 cases per year are performed in the base-case scenario. CONCLUSIONS: Over the period studied, RARP has become the dominant approach to RP, with significantly shorter LOS and lower blood transfusion rate. This translates to a significant cost-offset, which is further enhanced by increasing the case volume, extending the lifespan of the robot and reductions in the cost of consumables and capital.en_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.subjectEconomic Analysisen_US
dc.subjectHealth Technology Assessmenten_US
dc.subjectProstate Canceren_US
dc.subjectPatterns of Careen_US
dc.subjectPerioperative Outcomesen_US
dc.subjectRobotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomyen_US
dc.subjectRARPen_US
dc.subjectFundingen_US
dc.subjectSurgical Approachesen_US
dc.subjectRadical Prostatectomyen_US
dc.subjectRPen_US
dc.subjectVictorian Admitted Episode Dataseten_US
dc.subjectLength of Stayen_US
dc.subjectHospital Stayen_US
dc.subjectBlood Transfusion Ratesen_US
dc.subjectda Vincien_US
dc.subjectVictorian Admitted Episode Dataseten_US
dc.subjectEpworth Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.subjectGeneral Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.titlePatterns-of-care and health economic analysis of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the Australian public health system.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/bju.13317en_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleBJU Internationalen_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26350758en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesCentre for Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesCancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Urology, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Surgery, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesCabrini Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesAustralian Centre for Economic Research on Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.en_US
dc.type.studyortrialRetrospective studiesen_US
dc.type.contenttypeTexten_US
Appears in Collections:Cancer Services
Epworth Prostate Centre
Health Administration
UroRenal, Vascular

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.