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

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

Cite this