Evaluation of a day surgery unit;Evaluación de una unidad de cirugía de día

Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica/Pan American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 333-338

  Chirigliano, Gilda Verónica ^a   Noceti, María Cristina ^a  

^a NONE   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE;

AMBULATORY SURGERY; ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CENTER; HEALTH SERVICE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SURGICAL WARD; URUGUAY;

EID: 0036850840     PISSN: 10204989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s1020-49892002001100007     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Drummond M, Mason J. Biotechnology in the changing health-care environment: Methods for economic evaluation of innovative technology. En: The economic aspects of biotechnologies related to human health. Part 1: Biotechnology and medical innovation: Socio-economic assessment of the technology, the potential and the products. Paris: OECD; 1997. Disponible en: http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M000014000/M00014590.pdf. Acceso el 26 agosto 2002.
2. Brennan PF. Patient satisfaction and normative decision theory. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1995;2:250-259.
3. Klimberg IW, Locke DR, Dersch MW, Taub HC. TURP as same-day surgery. Contemporary Urology; nov 1996. Disponible en: http://www.contemporaryurology.com/be_core/u/sections/c_past_ issues/index.jsp?navtype=u&showPoll=no&filename. Acceso el 26 agosto 2002.
4. Gheiler EL, Lovisolo JA, Tiguert R, Teifilli MV, Grayson T, Olford G, et al. Results of a clinical care pathway for radical prostatectomy patients in an open hospital-multiphysician system. Eur Urol 1999;35:210-216
5. Palmer JS, Worwag EM, Conrad WG, Blitz BE, Chodak GW. Same day surgery for radical retropubic prostatectomy: Is it an attainable goal? Urology 1996;47:23-28.
6. Board N, Caplan G. Implications of decreasing surgical lengths of stay. Aust Health Rev 2000;23:62-76.
7. McCormack K, Scott NW, Go PMNYH, Ross S, Grant AM, on behalf of the EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration. Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair. The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Oxford: Update Software Ltd.; 2002.
8. Lawrence K, McWhinnie D, Goodwin A, Doll H, Gordon J, Gray A, et al. Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of inguinal hernia: Early results. Br Med J 1995;311(7011):981-985.
9. Lawrence K, Mc Whinnie, Goodwin A, Gray A, Gordon J, Storie J, et al. An economic evaluation of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. J Public Health Med 1996;18:41-48.
10. Farinas LP, Griffen FD. Cost containment and totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Endosc 2000;14:37-40.
11. Bartlett MK, Battit GE, Rockett AM, Perry EJ, Austen MG. The role of surgery on ambulatory patients in one teaching hospital. Arch Surg 1979;114:319-320.
12. Botella JA, Martinez A, Uribe N, Valero J, Pardo J, Ruiz J. Ambulatory surgery: Is a multidiscipinary unit necessary? Br J Surg 1997; 84:124-125.
13. Busse R, Schwartz FW. Financing reforms in the German hospital sector: From full cost cover principle to prospective case fees. Med Care 1997;35(10 Suppl):OS40-49.
14. Towle A. Changes in health care and continuing medical education for the 21st century. Br Med J 1998;316:301-304.
15. Weisbrod BA. The health care quadrilemma: An essay on technological change, insurance, quality of care an cost containment. J Econ Lit 1991;29:523-552.
16. Davis JE. Major ambulatory surgery of the general surgical patient. Management of breast disease and hernia of the abdominal wall. Surg Clin North Am 1987;67:733-760.