Abstract
Abstract
Objective
To investigate the assumption that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with lower costs, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation, while maintaining equal quality of life (QoL) and hearing outcomes, for the Dutch healthcare setting.
Study design
A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center.
Methods
Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group (i.e., one night admission). We performed an intention-to-treat evaluation of the difference of the total health care-related costs, hospital and out of hospital costs, between day-case and inpatient cochlear implantation, from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of one year. Audiometric outcomes, assessed using CVC scores, and QoL, assessed using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires, were taken into account.
Results
There were two drop-outs. The total health care-related costs were €41,828 in the inpatient group (n = 14) and €42,710 in the day-case group (n = 14). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 days (mean costs of €1,069) in the inpatient group and 0.7 days (mean costs of €701) for the day-case group. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out of hospital costs. The QoL at 2 months and 1 year postoperative, measured by the EQ-5D index value and HUI3 showed no statistically significant difference. The EQ-5D VAS score measured at 1 year postoperatively was statistically significantly higher in the inpatient group (84/100) than in the day-case group (65/100). There were no differences in postoperative complications, objective hearing outcomes, and number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits.
Conclusion
A day-case approach to cochlear implant surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related costs compared to an inpatient approach and does not affect the surgical outcome (complications and objective hearing measurements), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits).
Level of evidence
1.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference17 articles.
1. https://www.opciweb.nl/ci-centra/aantal-implantaties-in-nederland-t-m-2020/. Accessed 20 Apr 2022
2. Blume S (2000) Land of hope and glory: exploring cochlear implantation in the Netherlands. Sci Technol Hum Values 25(2):139–166
3. Kroneman M, Boerma W, van den Berg M et al (2016) Netherlands: health system review. Health Syst Transit 18(2):1–240
4. Hakkaart-van Roijen L, Van der Linden N, Bouwmans CAM et al (2015) Costing manual: methodology of costing research and reference prices for economic evaluations in healthcare [in Dutch: Kostenhandleiding: Methodologie van kostenonderzoek en referentieprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg]
5. Derks LSM, Smit AL, Thomeer HGXM (2023) Quality of life, hearing results, patient satisfaction and postoperative complications of day-case versus inpatient unilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a randomized controlled, equivalence trial. Submitted