Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Budget Impact of Restrictive Strategy Versus Usual Care for Cholecystectomy (SECURE-trial)

  • Carmen S. S. Latenstein*
  • , Aafke H. van Dijk
  • , Sarah Z. Wennmacker
  • , Joost P. H. Drenth
  • , Gert P. Westert
  • , Cornelis J. H. M. van Laarhoven
  • , Marja A. Boermeester
  • , Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf
  • , Philip R. de Reuver*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Radboud University Medical Center
  • Amsterdam UMC - University of Amsterdam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: A cost-effectiveness analysis of a multicenter randomized-controlled trial comparing restrictive strategy versus usual care in patients with gallstones showed that savings by restrictive strategy could not compensate for the lower proportion of pain-free patients. However, four subgroups based on combined stratification factors resulted in less cholecystectomies and more pain-free patients in restrictive strategy (female-low volume-BMI > 30, female-low volume-BMI25-30, female-high volume-BMI25-30, and male-low volume-BMI < 25). The aim of this study was to explore the budget impact from a hospital healthcare perspective of implementation of restrictive strategy in these subgroups. Methods: Data of the SECURE-trial were used to calculate the hospital budget impact with a time horizon of four years. Based on a study into practice variation, about 19% of hospitals treat patients according restrictive strategy. This represents the proportion of patients treated according restrictive strategy at the start of budget period. Three subanalyses were performed: a scenario analysis in which 30% of patients fall under a restrictive strategy in clinical practice, a sensitivity analysis in which we calculated the budget impact with the low and high 95% confidence limits of the expected future number of patients, a subgroup analysis in which restrictive strategy was also implemented in two additional subgroups (male-high volume-BMI < 25 and female-high volume-BMI >30). Results: Budget impact analysis showed savings of €6.7-€15.6 million (2.2%-5.6%) for the period 2021-2024/2025 by implementing the restrictive strategy in the four subgroups and provision of usual care in other patients. Sensitivity analysis with 30% of patients already in the restrictive strategy at the start of the budget period, resulted in savings between €5.4 million and €14.0 million (1.7%-5.0%). Conclusion: Performing a restrictive strategy for selection of cholecystectomy in subgroups of patients and provision of usual care in other patients will result in a lower overall hospital budget needed to treat patients with abdominal pain and gallstones. Trial registration: The Netherlands National Trial Register NTR4022. Registered on June 5, 2013.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)59-70
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of surgical research
Volume268
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2021

Keywords

  • Budget impact analysis: Hospital healthcare perspective: Cholecystolithiasis: Cholecystectomy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Budget Impact of Restrictive Strategy Versus Usual Care for Cholecystectomy (SECURE-trial)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this