TY - JOUR
T1 - Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release
T2 - A Detailed Analysis Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing at an Academic Medical Center
AU - Koehler, Daniel M.
AU - Balakrishnan, Ramji
AU - Lawler, Ericka A.
AU - Shah, Apurva S.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was aided by a grant from the Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation, with funding provided by the Aircast Foundation. The authors wish to thank Jodi Felderman, MHA, Director of Decision Support & Financial Systems, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, for assisting with the cost accounting required in this investigation.
Funding Information:
This work was aided by a grant from the Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation, with funding provided by the Aircast Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Society for Surgery of the Hand
PY - 2019/1
Y1 - 2019/1
N2 - Purpose: In order to effectively improve value in health care delivery, providers must thoroughly understand cost drivers. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is a novel accounting technique that may allow for precise characterization of procedural costs. The purpose of the present study was to use TDABC to characterize costs in a high-volume, low-complexity ambulatory procedure (endoscopic vs open carpal tunnel release [CTR]), identify cost drivers, and inform opportunities for clinical improvement. Methods: The costs of endoscopic and open CTR were calculated in a matched cohort investigation using TDABC. Detailed process maps including time stamps were created accounting for all clinical and administrative activities for both the endoscopic and the open treatment pathways on the day of ambulatory surgery. Personnel cost rates were calculated accounting for capacity, salary, and fringe benefits. Costs for direct consumable supplies were based on purchase price. Total costs were calculated by aggregating individual resource utilization and time data and were compared between the 2 surgical techniques. Results: Total procedural cost for the endoscopic CTR was 43.9% greater than the open technique ($2,759.70 vs $1,918.06). This cost difference was primarily driven by the disposable endoscopic blade assembly ($217), direct operating room costs related to procedural duration (44.8 vs 40.5 minutes), and physician labor. Conclusions: Endoscopic CTR is 44% more expensive than open CTR compared with a TDABC methodology at an academic medical center employing resident trainees. Granular cost data may be particularly valuable when comparing these 2 procedures, given the clinical equipoise of the surgical techniques. The identification of specific cost drivers with TDABC allows for targeted interventions to optimize value delivery. Type of study/level of evidence: Economic Analysis II.
AB - Purpose: In order to effectively improve value in health care delivery, providers must thoroughly understand cost drivers. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is a novel accounting technique that may allow for precise characterization of procedural costs. The purpose of the present study was to use TDABC to characterize costs in a high-volume, low-complexity ambulatory procedure (endoscopic vs open carpal tunnel release [CTR]), identify cost drivers, and inform opportunities for clinical improvement. Methods: The costs of endoscopic and open CTR were calculated in a matched cohort investigation using TDABC. Detailed process maps including time stamps were created accounting for all clinical and administrative activities for both the endoscopic and the open treatment pathways on the day of ambulatory surgery. Personnel cost rates were calculated accounting for capacity, salary, and fringe benefits. Costs for direct consumable supplies were based on purchase price. Total costs were calculated by aggregating individual resource utilization and time data and were compared between the 2 surgical techniques. Results: Total procedural cost for the endoscopic CTR was 43.9% greater than the open technique ($2,759.70 vs $1,918.06). This cost difference was primarily driven by the disposable endoscopic blade assembly ($217), direct operating room costs related to procedural duration (44.8 vs 40.5 minutes), and physician labor. Conclusions: Endoscopic CTR is 44% more expensive than open CTR compared with a TDABC methodology at an academic medical center employing resident trainees. Granular cost data may be particularly valuable when comparing these 2 procedures, given the clinical equipoise of the surgical techniques. The identification of specific cost drivers with TDABC allows for targeted interventions to optimize value delivery. Type of study/level of evidence: Economic Analysis II.
KW - Endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release
KW - time-driven activity-based costing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048504189&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85048504189&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.04.023
DO - 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.04.023
M3 - Article
C2 - 29903541
AN - SCOPUS:85048504189
SN - 0363-5023
VL - 44
SP - 62.e1-62.e9
JO - Journal of Hand Surgery
JF - Journal of Hand Surgery
IS - 1
ER -