Blog
About

284
views
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    1
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Per-abdominal and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

      Preprint

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cholelithiasis is one of the major problems which need cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a newer technique. But there is a need to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of per-abdominal and laparoscopic method from patients perspective. The study was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of per-abdominal and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Materials and Methods:
This cross sectional study in two sample situations was conducted among 90 purposively selected cholecystectomy patients of which 60 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and 30 patients underwent per-abdominal cholecystectomy (PAC) from three tertiary level government hospitals of Dhaka, Bangladesh at the time of their discharge through face to face interview using a semi-structured questionnaire and checklist. The study found average age 45.33(13.63) and 41.75(13.39) years in PAC and LC respectively. Average monthly income was less in the PAC group Tk.23200.00(12374.61) than LC Tk.24925.00(12166.86). Average duration of suffering from cholelithiasis was 9.50(8.68) months in PAC group and 12.43(17.49) months in LC group. Average hospital stay was 13.97(6.88) days in PAC group while it was 12.02(6.66) days in LC group. Average treatment cost was little higher Tk.21927.407795.89 in LC group than Tk.21466.306261.42 in the PAC group. Both direct cost and indirect cost were also higher in LC group (Tk.18668.305965.67 and Tk.3661.324229.85) than in PAC group (Tk.18228.004624.75 and Tk.3350.004124.58). But these differences were not statistically significant. In both groups treatment cost significantly increased with duration of hospitalization (correlation, p<0.01). Cure rate was significantly high in LC group (94.4%) than in PAC group (86.7%) (χ2, p<0.05).
This study revealed LC method is cost-effective than PAC method. Total treatment cost in LC can be reduced by minimizing hospital cost, laboratory cost and securing the income of the patients which enhance the economic load.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          ScienceOpen Preprints
          ScienceOpen
          30 December 2019
          Affiliations
          [1 ] MBBS,MPH
          Article
          10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPYDTV6.v1

          This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0 , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com .

          Comments

          Dr. Md. Shahariar Islam

          Medical Officer in Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh (under ministry of Health & Family welfare) since 2014 , Completed his MPH course in Health Promotion & Health Education from in 2019

          at NIPSOM , Dhaka , Bangladesh.

          Contact information :

          Address: National Institute of Preventive & Social Medicine (NIPSOM) ,

          Mohakhali , Dhaka-1212 , Bangladesh.

           

          Phone no: 8801737998282

          Email id: dr_s_islam@yahoo.com

          Facebook account: https://web.facebook.com/shahariarislam.richard

           

          2020-01-12 08:23 UTC
          +1

          Comment on this article