Cost Analysis of Surgical Site Infections

Urban, Joshua A.

doi:10.1089/sur.2006.7.s1-19

Cited by 213 publications

(139 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently the cost assigned to developing an SSI is quite low. Other studies have reported median increases in length of stay of several days and consequently assign high costs (exceeding $3,000 in many cases) to SSIs [29,30]. If more severe SSIs requiring longer hospital stays are observed in a larger trial and NPWT proves effective at reducing SSI incidence then the cost-effectiveness results may be more convincing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

Heard

Chaboyer

Anderson

et al. 2017

Journal of Tissue Viability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

Heard

Chaboyer

Anderson

et al. 2017

Journal of Tissue Viability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The purpose of undergoing MRSA screening is to facilitate appropriate treatment of colonized patients with intranasal mupirocin and topical chlorhexidine; such treatment has demonstrated success in reducing the number of SSIs and subsequently reduce patient morbidity and hospital costs [10,15,16]. As a result of the limited followup available for patients in our cohort, our study was not able to address the rate of SSIs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is the Prevalence of MRSA Colonization in Elective Spine Cases?

Chen

Chivukula

Jacobs

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection is increasing. However, the prevalence of MRSA colonization among patients undergoing spine surgery is unclear. Questions/purposes We therefore (1) determined the prevalence of MRSA colonization in a population of patients scheduled for elective spine surgery; and (2) evaluated whether MRSA screening and treatment reduce the rate of early wound complications. Methods We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from 1002 patients undergoing elective spine surgery in 2010. There were 719 primary and 283 revision surgeries. Instrumentation was used in 72.0% cases and autologous iliac crest bone graft was taken in 65.1%. Twelve patients were lost to followup; of the remaining 990 patients, 503 were screened for MRSA and 487 were not. MRSA-colonized patients were treated with mupirocin and chlorhexidine. An early wound complication was defined as wound drainage or the presence of an abscess. Patients were followed for a minimum of 3 months (average, 7 months; range, 3-545 days). Results Of the patients undergoing elective spine surgery and screened for MRSA, 14 of 503 (2.8%) were colonized with MRSA. The rates of early wound complications were similar for patients who were screened and pretreated for MRSA (17 of 503 [3.4%]) compared with those who were not (17 of 487 [3.5%]). Conclusions The colonization rate for MRSA in our elective spine surgery population was comparable to that in the arthroplasty literature.

show abstract

“…1 A large portion of these costs are attributed to longer hospitalizations, readmissions, and additional surgeries required for the treatment of infected patients. 2 The risk of developing surgical site infections (SSIs) varies tremendously, with orthopedic trauma demonstrating higher rates of SSI than many other surgical specialties. 3,4 However, since orthopedic trauma surgeons are currently reimbursed through a fee-for-service model, there has been little incentive to investigate the costs of treating SSIs among trauma patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical site infection in orthopedic trauma: A case–control study evaluating risk factors and cost

Thakore

Greenberg

Shi

et al. 2015

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground: With the shift of our healthcare system toward a value-based system of reimbursement, complications such as surgical site infections (SSI) may not be reimbursed.The purpose of our study was to investigate the costs and risk factors of SSI for orthopedic trauma patients.Methods: Through retrospective analysis, 1819 patients with isolated fractures were identified. Of those, 78 patients who developed SSIs were compared to 78 uninfected control patients. Patients were matched by fracture location, type of fracture, duration of surgery, and as close as possible to age, year of surgery, and type of procedure. Costs for treatment during primary hospitalization and initial readmission were determined and potential risk factors were collected from patient charts. A Wilcoxon test was used to compare the overall costs of treatment for case and control patients. Costs were further broken down into professional fees and technical charges for analysis. Risk factors for SSIs were analyzed through a chi-squared analysis.Results: Median cost for treatment for patients with SSIs was $108,782 compared to $57,418 for uninfected patients ( p < 0.001). Professional fees and technical charges were found to be significantly higher for infected patients. No significant risk factors for SSIs were determined.Conclusions: Our findings indicate the potential for financial losses in our new healthcare system due to uncompensated care. SSIs nearly double the cost of treatment for orthopedic trauma patients. There is no single driver of these costs. Reducing postoperative stay may be one method for reducing the cost of treating SSIs, whereas quality management programs may decrease risk of infection.

show abstract

Cost Analysis of Surgical Site Infections

Abstract: The need to treat SSIs places a severe financial strain on health care resources. It is possible that treating high-risk surgical patients medically will prove to be more cost-effective than repeated operations.

Cited by 213 publications

References 10 publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

What Is the Prevalence of MRSA Colonization in Elective Spine Cases?

Surgical site infection in orthopedic trauma: A case–control study evaluating risk factors and cost

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About