Savings from reducing low‐value general surgical interventions. BJS 2018; 105: 13-25.
Published: 8th November 2017
Authors: H. T. Malik, J. Marti, A. Darzi, E. Mossialos
Finding opportunities for improving efficiency is important, given the pressure on national health budgets. Identifying and reducing low‐value interventions that deliver little benefit is key. A systematic literature evaluation was done to identify low‐value interventions in general surgery, with further assessment of their cost.
A multiplatform method of identifying low value interventions was undertaken, including a broad literature search, a targeted database search, and opportunistic sampling. The results were then stratified by impact, assessing both frequency and cost.
Seventy‐one low‐value general surgical procedures were identified, of which five were of high frequency and high cost (highest impact), 22 were of high cost and low frequency, 23 were of low cost and high frequency, and 21 were of low cost and low frequency (lowest impact). Highest impact interventions included inguinal hernia repair in minimally symptomatic patients, inappropriate gastroscopy, interval cholecystectomy, CT to diagnose appendicitis and routine endoscopy in those who had CT‐confirmed diverticulitis. Their estimated cost was €153 383 953.
Low‐value services place a burden on health budgets. Stopping only five high‐volume, high‐cost general surgical procedures could save the National Health Service €153 million per annum.Full text
You may also be interested in
Evaluating the collection, comparability and findings of six global surgery indicators. BJS 2019; 106: e138-e150.
Authors: H. Holmer, A. Bekele, L. Hagander, E. M. Harrison, P. Kamali, J. S. Ng‐Kamstra et al.
Cost‐effectiveness analysis of a multicentre randomized clinical trial comparing surgery with conservative management for recurrent and ongoing diverticulitis (DIRECT trial).
Authors: H. E. Bolkenstein, G. A. de Wit, E. C. J. Consten, B. J. M. Van de Wall, I. A. M. J. Broeders, W. A. Draaisma et al.
Notes: Maintained benefits
Validation of the Bluebelle Wound Healing Questionnaire for assessment of surgical‐site infection in closed primary wounds after hospital discharge.
Authors: Rhiannon Macefield, Jane Blazeby, Barnaby Reeves, Sara Brookes, Kerry Avery, Chris Rogers et al.
Notes: Simple and valid
Authors: K. Søreide, D. C. Winter
Authors: R. D. Staiger, H. Schwandt, M. A. Puhan, P.‐A. Clavien
Authors: S. Wiig, C. Macrae
Authors: F. Dossa, N. N. Baxter
Authors: S. M. L. de Mik, F. E. Stubenrouch, R. Balm, D. T. Ubbink
Notes: Heterogeneous data
Authors: M. L. Nicholson, C. Yong, P. B. Trotter, L. Grant, S. A. Hosgood
Notes: Rare, but predictable
Meta‐analysis of the influence of lifestyle changes for preoperative weight loss on surgical outcomes.
Authors: M. Roman, A. Monaghan, G. F. Serraino, D. Miller, S. Pathak, F. Lai et al.
Notes: Possible but how much is enough?
Multicentre cohort study of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering therapy cessation after bariatric surgery.
Authors: J. Thereaux, T. Lesuffleur, S. Czernichow, A. Basdevant, S. Msika, D. Nocca et al.
Notes: Better than controls