Study Objective. To compare the costs of tubal anastomosis performed by laparoscopy and by laparotomy. Design. Cost analysis study using the hospital administrative database (Canadian Task Force classification 11-2). Setting. University teaching hospital. Patients. Eighty-nine women. Intervention. Tubal anastomosis by laparoscopy (43) and by laparotomy (46). Measurements and Main Results. Tubal anastomosis took longer when performed by laparoscopy than by laparotomy; however, the total time patients spent in the operating room was similar. Women treated by laparoscopy spent more time in the recovery room. Labor costs for nurses in the operating room and recovery room costs were significantly higher in the laparoscopy group. Costs for operating room supplies were similar. Pharmacy costs and expenses in the ward were lower in the laparoscopy group. The mean total cost for laparoscopic tubal anastomosis was $861 ± 137 and for laparotomy was $1348 ± 188 (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Laparoscopic tubal anastomosis costs less than tubal anastomosis by laparotomy.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||5|
|Journal||Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists|
|State||Published - Jan 1 2002|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Obstetrics and Gynecology