Cost-effectiveness of open versus laparoscopic appendectomy: a multilevel approach with propensity score matching
- 632 Downloads
To compare postoperative complications and cost of treatment of laparoscopic (LA) versus open appendectomy (OA) and to identify the most cost-effective treatment method.
Patients treated for appendectomy in US veterans health administration (VHA) hospitals in 2005 were included into our study. Direct medical cost and postoperative complications during hospitalization were used as outcomes. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline imbalances between treatment groups. It was adjusted for the severity of appendicitis, comorbidities according to Charlson Comorbidity Index, and demographic variables. 1:1 optimal matching with replacement was performed. Based on the matched samples, we estimated generalized linear mixed regression models for costs (gamma model) and postoperative complications (logit model). Besides patients’ covariates, predictors of hospital resource use and quality of care at the hospital level were considered as explanatory variables.
The total study population comprised of 1,128 patients (370 LA, 758 OA) from 95 VHA hospitals. Type of appendectomy had a significant influence on total costs (P = 0.005), with predicted costs for LA being 17.1% lower in comparison to OA (OA: 10,851 US$ [95%CI: 9,707 US$; 12,131 US$] vs. LA: 8,995 US$ [95%CI: 8,073 US$; 10,022 US$]). Differences in the predicted overall postoperative complication were not significant between LA and OA (P = 0.6311). Severity of appendicitis had a significant impact on costs and postoperative complications.
Predicted costs for LA were 1,856 US$ lower than for OA while the postoperative complication rate did not differ significantly. Thus, LA is the treatment of choice from a provider’s perspective.
KeywordsCost-effectiveness Laparoscopic appendectomy Veterans health administration Administrative data Propensity score matching
JEL ClassificationI19 E17 C2
- 25.Kazemier, G., Bijness, A.B., Schilthuis, M.S., Kazemier, G., Bijness, A.B., Schilthuis, M.S.: Appendicitis and pelvic inflammatory disease. In: Van Lanschot, J., Gouma, D., Jansen, P., Jones, E.A., Pinedo, H.M., Schouten, W.R., Tytgat, G. (eds.) Integrated medical and surgical gastroenterology, pp. 338–345. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York (2004)Google Scholar
- 37.Normand, S.L.T., Landrum, M.B., Guadagnoli, E., Ayanian, J.Z., Ryan, T.J., Cleary, P.D., McNeil, B.J.: Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 54, 387–398 (2001)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Snijders, T., Bosker, R.: Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage, New York (1999)Google Scholar
- 41.Goldstein, H.: Multilevel models. In: Armitrage, P., Colton, C. (eds.) Encyclopedia of biostatistics, pp. 2725–2731. Wiley, Chichester (1998)Google Scholar
- 46.Henderson, J.: Health economics & policy. South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason (2008)Google Scholar
- 48.Cothren, C.C., Moore, E.E., Johnson, J.L., Moore, J.B., Ciesla, D.J., Burch, J.M.: Can we afford to do laparoscopic appendectomy in an academic hospital? Am. J. Surg. 190, 950–954 (2005)Google Scholar
- 50.Nakhamiyayev, V., Galldin, L., Chiarello, M., Lumba, A., Gorecki, P.: Laparoscopic appendectomy is the preferred approach for appendicitis: a retrospective review of two practice patterns. Surg. Endosc. 24:859–864 (2010)Google Scholar
- 53.Yeh, C.C., Wu, S.C., Liao, C.C., Su, L.T., Hsieh, C.H., Li, T.C.: Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis is more favorable for patients with comorbidities, the elderly, and those with complicated appendicitis: a nationwide population-based study. Surg. Endosc. 25:2932–2942 (2011)Google Scholar
- 60.Gordon, T.A., Bowman, H.M., Bass, E.B., Lillemoe, K.D., Yeo, C.J., Heitmiller, R.F., Choti, M.A., Burleyson, G.P., Hsieh, G., Cameron, J.L.: Complex gastrointestinal surgery: impact of provider experience on clinical and economic outcomes. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 189, 46–56 (1999)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 65.Rosenbaum, P.R.: Observational studies. Springer, New York (2002)Google Scholar