» Articles » PMID: 31964178

The Impact of Patient, Procedural, and Staffing Factors Upon Ureteroscopy Cost

Overview
Journal J Endourol
Publisher Mary Ann Liebert
Date 2020 Jan 23
PMID 31964178
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate factors during ureteroscopy that can potentially impact procedure cost. A retrospective review of 129 consecutive elective ureteroscopy cases was performed to determine direct procedure cost. Direct cost was defined as cost incurred because of operating room expenses, including operating room time, staffing expenses, equipment, and supply costs. Data regarding patient, procedural, and operating room staffing characteristics were compared between the most and least expensive cases. Univariate and logistic regression analysis were performed to identify factors predictive of higher costs. The average direct ureteroscopy cost was $3298/case. On univariate analysis, ureteroscopies in the highest 50th cost percentile had larger stone burden (170.1 146 mm;  = 0.03) and longer operative times (95.3 49.9 minutes;  < 0.01), were more likely performed for non-stone indications (21.4% 7.2%;  = 0.03), more likely to include a resident (65.5% 43.6%;  = 0.02), and less likely to have a dedicated urology scrub technician (38.2% 61.8%;  = 0.01) compared to cases in the lowest 50th percentile. The presence of a resident, larger stone burden, absence of a dedicated scrub technician, and longer operative time were associated with an average cost increase of $516, $700, $1122, and $1401, respectively. Logistic regression analysis showed that operating room time was the only factor predicting higher cost (OR [odds ratio] 12.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-84.0). A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the presence of a resident during ureteroscopy (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-8.0) and larger stone burden (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.0-1.013) were significantly associated with longer operative times. Operating room time is the primary determinant of ureteroscopy case cost. All efforts should be made to decrease operative time, although balancing patient safety and maintaining a quality training environment.

Citing Articles

Economic evaluation of surgical treatments for urolithiasis in a public hospital.

Sanchez Garcia J, Freire Rodriguez A, Benavides Pineda M, Castro Jul M, Castro Iglesias M, Sanchez Ramos J Int Urol Nephrol. 2025; .

PMID: 40029507 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-025-04422-4.


Clinical significance of stone culture during endourological procedures in predicting post-operative urinary sepsis: should it be a standard of care-evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis from EAU section of Urolithiasis (EULIS).

Ripa F, Cerrato C, Tandogdu Z, Seitz C, Montanari E, Choong S World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):614.

PMID: 39487358 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05319-0.


Stone removing efficiency and safety comparison between single use ureteroscope and reusable ureteroscope: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ma Y, Jian Z, Jin X, Li H, Wang K Transl Androl Urol. 2021; 10(4):1627-1636.

PMID: 33968651 PMC: 8100856. DOI: 10.21037/tau-20-1399.