33 research outputs found

    Autologous reconstructions are associated with greater overall medium-term care costs than implant-based reconstructions in the Finnish healthcare system : A retrospective interim case-control cohort study

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Previous studies have mainly reported the short-term costs of different reconstruction techniques. Revision operations may increase costs in longer follow-up. Authors report medium-term data on different reconstruction methods. We hypothesised that the reconstruction method would affect not only the duration of reconstruction process but also total costs. Methods: The reconstruction database was reviewed from 2008 to 2019. Women with autologous (deep inferior epigastric perforator, transverse musculocutaneous gracilis and latissimus dorsi [LD] without implant) and implant-based (implant and LD with implant) reconstructions were included. Variables evaluated included age, body mass index, smoking, comorbidities, radiotherapy, complications and readmissions. Risk factors for multiple revision surgeries were analysed. Time to definitive reconstruction and related costs were also calculated. Results: In total, 591 patients with autologous reconstructions and 202 with implant-based reconstructions were included. The median follow-up time was 73 months. Definitive reconstruction was obtained in 443 days in implant-based reconstructions and in 403 days in autologous reconstructions (P = 0.050). Independent risk factors for multiple surgeries were younger age (P < 0.001) and comorbidity (P = 0.008). No statistically significant difference was observed in the rate of overall surgical procedures (P = 0.098), but implant-based reconstructions were more commonly associated with two or more planned operations (P = 0.008). Autologous reconstructions were associated with greater total cost (22052vs.22 052 vs. 18 329, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This review of reconstructions over a 12-year study period revealed that autologous reconstructions are associated with greater overall costs, but there is no statistically significant difference in reconstruction time or rate of surgical procedures. However, a full cost assessment between reconstructive techniques requires a much longer follow-up period.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

    Day surgery in reduction mammaplasty – saving money or increasing complications?

    Get PDF
    Background: The benefits of reduction mammoplasty procedures have been reported previously. However, to control the rise in public healthcare costs, we need to find ways of conducting these procedures safely and more cost-effectively. Our aim was to examine whether reduction mammaplasty performed in an outpatient setting has comparable surgical complication rates to those performed in an inpatient setting. We also investigated whether any savings gained from day surgery are still present after any possible indirect costs are considered. Methods: The study population comprised 276 patients who underwent reduction mammaplasty in a single center between January 2019 and February 2021. Data were collected from patient medical records. The costs associated with the primary procedure and any possible additional expenses were calculated. Basic statistical comparisons were performed for propensity score-matched data. Results: Complication rates, readmissions, number of contacts to the health care system, and need for additional surgical interventions were comparable between outpatients and inpatients. The basic costs for outpatients were 2990 euros per patient and 3923 euros for inpatients. Total costs after possible extra expenses were lower in day surgery as it was markedly more cost-effective than patients treated as inpatients. Conclusions: Reduction mammaplasties can be safely performed in an outpatient setting. Moreover, the emergence of complications is comparable to those performed in an inpatient setting. An outpatient setting produced significant cost savings not only in the immediate costs of primary surgery but also in the costs associated with possible complications and extra contacts to the healthcare system.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

    Childhood socioeconomic status and lifetime health behaviors : The Young Finns Study

    Get PDF
    Background: Differences in health behaviors partly explain the socioeconomic gap in cardiovascular health. We prospectively examined the association between childhood socioeconomic status (SES) and lifestyle factors in adulthood, and the difference of lifestyle factors according to childhood SES in multiple time points from childhood to adulthood. Methods and results: The sample comprised 3453 participants aged 3-18 years at baseline (1980) from the longitudinal Young Finns Study. The participants were followed up for 31 years (N = 1675-1930). SES in childhood was characterized as reported annual family income and classified on an 8-point scale. Diet, smoking, alcohol intake and physical activity were used as adult and life course lifestyle factors. Higher childhood SES predicted a healthier diet in adulthood in terms of lower consumption of meat (beta +/- SE -3.6 +/- 0.99, p <0.001), higher consumption of fish (1.1 +/- 0.5, p = 0.04) and higher diet score (0.14 +/- 0.044, p = 0.01). Childhood SES was also directly associated with physical activity index (0.059 +/- 0.023, p = 0.009) and inversely with the risk of being a smoker (RR 0.90 95%CI 0.85-0.95, p <0.001) and the amount of pack years (-0.47 +/- 0.18, p = 0.01). Life course level of smoking was significantly higher and physical activity index lower among those below the median childhood SES when compared with those above the median SES. Conclusions: These results show that childhood SES associates with several lifestyle factors 31 years later in adulthood. Therefore, attention could be paid to lifestyle behaviors of children of low SES families to promote cardiovascular health. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

    From habits of attrition to modes of inclusion: enhancing the role of private practitioners in routine disease surveillance

    Get PDF
    Background: Private practitioners are the preferred first point of care in a majority of low and middle-income countries and in this position, best placed for the surveillance of diseases. However their contribution to routine surveillance data is marginal. This systematic review aims to explore evidence with regards to the role, contribution, and involvement of private practitioners in routine disease data notification. We examined the factors that determine the inclusion of, and the participation thereof of private practitioners in disease surveillance activities. Methods: Literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Web of Knowledge, WHOLIS, and WHO-IRIS databases to identify peer reviewed and gray full-text documents in English with no limits for year of publication or study design. Forty manuscripts were reviewed. Results: The current participation of private practitioners in disease surveillance efforts is appalling. The main barriers to their participation are inadequate knowledge leading to unsatisfactory attitudes and misperceptions that influence their practices. Complicated reporting mechanisms with unclear guidelines, along with unsatisfactory attitudes on behalf of the government and surveillance program managers also contribute to the underreporting of cases. Infrastructural barriers especially the availability of computers and skilled human resources are critical to improving private sector participation in routine disease surveillance. Conclusion: The issues identified are similar to those for underreporting within the Integrated infectious Disease Surveillance and Response systems (IDSR) which collects data mainly from public healthcare facilities. We recommend that surveillance program officers should provide periodic training, supportive supervision and offer regular feedback to the practitioners from both public as well as private sectors in order to improve case notification. Governments need to take leadership and foster collaborative partnerships between the public and private sectors and most importantly exercise regulatory authority where needed
    corecore