The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons

Yair Lotan, Christian Bolenz, Amit Gupta, Timothy Hotze, Richard Ho, Jeffrey A Cadeddu, Claus Roehrborn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Type - Therapy (economics analysis) Level of Evidence 2b Objective To evaluate the profit margins for radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), and the effect on the reimbursement to the urologist, as there has been a dramatic increase in use of RALP, with the cost of the robot borne by hospitals. METHODS Data on costs and payments to hospital and surgeon from 2003 to 2008 for RRP, LRP and RALP were obtained from the hospital and urology department. We determined the profit based on the difference between payments received and total cost. Results Between 2000 and 2008, 1279 RPs were performed at our private hospital. The introduction of RALP increased total number of RPs and replaced most RRPs. RRP represents the only procedure where payments exceed total costs. For RRP there was a significantly higher profit for patients with comorbidities. The type of payer had a large effect on profit. Medicare provides a small profit for RRP but a significant loss of >US$4000 for RALP. While all insurance companies resulted in losses for LRP and RALP, there was variability of almost $600/case for LRP and >$1400/case for RALP. RALP provided the highest reimbursement for the surgeon due to additional reimbursement for the S2900 code (use of robot). Conclusions The introduction of RALP has increased the case volume at our hospital and improved profits for the surgeon. The hospital loses money on each LRP and RALP case compared with RRP, which provides a small profit.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1531-1535
Number of pages5
JournalBJU International
Volume105
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2010

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Surgeons
Costs and Cost Analysis
N-((R)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)ethyl)-2-cyano-3,3-dimethylbutanamide
Hospital Urology Department
Private Hospitals

Keywords

  • Insurance
  • Profits
  • Prostatectomy
  • Robotics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons. / Lotan, Yair; Bolenz, Christian; Gupta, Amit; Hotze, Timothy; Ho, Richard; Cadeddu, Jeffrey A; Roehrborn, Claus.

In: BJU International, Vol. 105, No. 11, 06.2010, p. 1531-1535.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lotan, Yair ; Bolenz, Christian ; Gupta, Amit ; Hotze, Timothy ; Ho, Richard ; Cadeddu, Jeffrey A ; Roehrborn, Claus. / The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons. In: BJU International. 2010 ; Vol. 105, No. 11. pp. 1531-1535.
@article{b7d2e78d5c5d47caaa1a466b648c1d48,
title = "The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons",
abstract = "Study Type - Therapy (economics analysis) Level of Evidence 2b Objective To evaluate the profit margins for radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), and the effect on the reimbursement to the urologist, as there has been a dramatic increase in use of RALP, with the cost of the robot borne by hospitals. METHODS Data on costs and payments to hospital and surgeon from 2003 to 2008 for RRP, LRP and RALP were obtained from the hospital and urology department. We determined the profit based on the difference between payments received and total cost. Results Between 2000 and 2008, 1279 RPs were performed at our private hospital. The introduction of RALP increased total number of RPs and replaced most RRPs. RRP represents the only procedure where payments exceed total costs. For RRP there was a significantly higher profit for patients with comorbidities. The type of payer had a large effect on profit. Medicare provides a small profit for RRP but a significant loss of >US$4000 for RALP. While all insurance companies resulted in losses for LRP and RALP, there was variability of almost $600/case for LRP and >$1400/case for RALP. RALP provided the highest reimbursement for the surgeon due to additional reimbursement for the S2900 code (use of robot). Conclusions The introduction of RALP has increased the case volume at our hospital and improved profits for the surgeon. The hospital loses money on each LRP and RALP case compared with RRP, which provides a small profit.",
keywords = "Insurance, Profits, Prostatectomy, Robotics",
author = "Yair Lotan and Christian Bolenz and Amit Gupta and Timothy Hotze and Richard Ho and Cadeddu, {Jeffrey A} and Claus Roehrborn",
year = "2010",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08996.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "105",
pages = "1531--1535",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons

AU - Lotan, Yair

AU - Bolenz, Christian

AU - Gupta, Amit

AU - Hotze, Timothy

AU - Ho, Richard

AU - Cadeddu, Jeffrey A

AU - Roehrborn, Claus

PY - 2010/6

Y1 - 2010/6

N2 - Study Type - Therapy (economics analysis) Level of Evidence 2b Objective To evaluate the profit margins for radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), and the effect on the reimbursement to the urologist, as there has been a dramatic increase in use of RALP, with the cost of the robot borne by hospitals. METHODS Data on costs and payments to hospital and surgeon from 2003 to 2008 for RRP, LRP and RALP were obtained from the hospital and urology department. We determined the profit based on the difference between payments received and total cost. Results Between 2000 and 2008, 1279 RPs were performed at our private hospital. The introduction of RALP increased total number of RPs and replaced most RRPs. RRP represents the only procedure where payments exceed total costs. For RRP there was a significantly higher profit for patients with comorbidities. The type of payer had a large effect on profit. Medicare provides a small profit for RRP but a significant loss of >US$4000 for RALP. While all insurance companies resulted in losses for LRP and RALP, there was variability of almost $600/case for LRP and >$1400/case for RALP. RALP provided the highest reimbursement for the surgeon due to additional reimbursement for the S2900 code (use of robot). Conclusions The introduction of RALP has increased the case volume at our hospital and improved profits for the surgeon. The hospital loses money on each LRP and RALP case compared with RRP, which provides a small profit.

AB - Study Type - Therapy (economics analysis) Level of Evidence 2b Objective To evaluate the profit margins for radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), and the effect on the reimbursement to the urologist, as there has been a dramatic increase in use of RALP, with the cost of the robot borne by hospitals. METHODS Data on costs and payments to hospital and surgeon from 2003 to 2008 for RRP, LRP and RALP were obtained from the hospital and urology department. We determined the profit based on the difference between payments received and total cost. Results Between 2000 and 2008, 1279 RPs were performed at our private hospital. The introduction of RALP increased total number of RPs and replaced most RRPs. RRP represents the only procedure where payments exceed total costs. For RRP there was a significantly higher profit for patients with comorbidities. The type of payer had a large effect on profit. Medicare provides a small profit for RRP but a significant loss of >US$4000 for RALP. While all insurance companies resulted in losses for LRP and RALP, there was variability of almost $600/case for LRP and >$1400/case for RALP. RALP provided the highest reimbursement for the surgeon due to additional reimbursement for the S2900 code (use of robot). Conclusions The introduction of RALP has increased the case volume at our hospital and improved profits for the surgeon. The hospital loses money on each LRP and RALP case compared with RRP, which provides a small profit.

KW - Insurance

KW - Profits

KW - Prostatectomy

KW - Robotics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77952161468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77952161468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08996.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08996.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 19874301

AN - SCOPUS:77952161468

VL - 105

SP - 1531

EP - 1535

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 11

ER -