The Effect of the diffusion of the surgical robot on the hospital-level utilization of partial Nephrectomy

Medical Care

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 71-78

  Sivarajan, Ganesh ^a   Taksler, Glen B ^b   Walter, Dawn ^a   Gross, Cary P ^c   Sosa, Raul E ^a   Makarov, Danil V ^a,d,e,f  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS   (United States)

^e NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Nephrectomy; Nephron Sparing Surgery; Outcomes; Renal Cell Carcinoma; Robotics

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SURGERY; COHORT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH INSURANCE; HOSPITAL BED; HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPERATING ROOM; PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROBOTICS; TEACHING HOSPITAL; HIGH VOLUME HOSPITAL; HOSPITAL; INSURANCE; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; MASS COMMUNICATION; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHRECTOMY; PROCEDURES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, HIGH-VOLUME; HOSPITALS, URBAN; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHRECTOMY; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84919341654     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: 15371948     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000259     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Kolata G. Results Unproven, Robotic Surgery Wins Converts. The New York Times. February 14, 2010; Health.
2. Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, Gettman MT. The new economics of radical prostatectomy: cost comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot assisted techniques. J Urol. 2004;172(4 pt 1):1431-1435.
3. Carreyrou J. Surgical robot examined in injuries. Wall Street Journal. 2010. Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230 4703104575173952145907526.html. Accessed May 4, 2010.
4. Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2009: 1557-1564.
5. da Vincis Procedures. 2013. Available at: http://www.davinci surgery.com/da-vinci-surgery/da-vinci-procedures/. Accessed May 2, 2013.
6. Makarov DV, Yu JB, Desai RA, et al. The association between diffusion of the surgical robot and radical prostatectomy rates. Med Care. 2011;49:333-339.
7. Stitzenberg KB, Wong YN, Nielsen ME, et al. Trends in radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care. Cancer. 2012;118:54-62.
8. Neuner JM, See WA, Pezzin LE, et al. The association of robotic surgical technology and hospital prostatectomy volumes: increasing market share through the adoption of technology. Cancer. 2012; 118:371-377.
9. Robson CJ. Radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1963;89:37-42.
10. Leibovich BC, Blute M, Cheville JC, et al. Nephron sparing surgery for appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between 4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2004;171: 1066-1070.
11. Becker F, Siemer S, Humke U, et al. Elective nephron sparing surgery should become standard treatment for small unilateral renal cell carcinoma: long-Term survival data of 216 patients. Eur Urol. 2006; 49:308-313.
12. Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Lohse CM, et al. Partial versus radical nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumors. J Urol. 2009;182: 2601-2606.
13. Huang WC, Levey AS, Serio AM, et al. Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:735-740.
14. Go AS, Chertow GM, Fan D, et al. Chronic kidney disease and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1296-1305.
15. Rifkin DE, Shlipak MG, Katz R, et al. Rapid kidney function decline and mortality risk in older adults. Archiv Intern Med. 2008;168: 2212-2218.
16. Dulabon LM, Lowrance WT, Russo P, et al. Trends in renal tumor surgery delivery within the United States. Cancer. 2010;116:2316-2321.
17. Miller DC, Hollingsworth JM, Hafez KS, et al. Partial nephrectomy for small renal masses: an emerging quality of care concern? J Urol. 2006;175(3 pt 1):853-857; discussion 858.
18. Kim SP, Shah ND, Weight CJ, et al. Contemporary trends in nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma in the United States: results from a population based cohort. J Urol. 2011;186:1779-1785.
19. Patel SG, Penson DF, Pabla B, et al. National trends in the use of partial nephrectomy: a rising tide that has not lifted all boats. J Urol. 2012;187:816-821.
20. Uzzo RG, Novick AC. Nephron sparing surgery for renal tumors: indications, techniques and outcomes. J Urol. 2001;166:6-18.
21. Stifelman MD, Caruso RP, Nieder AM, et al. Robot-Assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. JSLS. 2005;9:83-86.
22. Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK, et al. Robotic-Assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: technique and initial clinical experience with DaVinci robotic system. Urology. 2004;64:914-918.
23. Lee S, Oh J, Hong SK, et al. Open versus robot-Assisted partial nephrectomy: effect on clinical outcome. J Endourol. 2011;25:1181-1185.
24. Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG, et al. Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol. 2009;182:866-872.
25. Patel HD, Mullins JK, Pierorazio PM, et al. Trends in renal surgery: robotic technology is associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2012;189:1229-1235.
26. Kievit RA, Frankenhuis WE, Waldorp LJ, et al. Simpsons paradox in psychological science: a practical guide. Front Psychol. 2013;4:513.
27. Kardos SV, Gross CP, Shah ND, et al. Association of type of renal surgery and access to robotic technology for kidney cancer: results from a population-based cohort. BJU Int. 2014;114:549-554.
28. Hollenbeck BK, Taub DA, Miller DC, et al. National utilization trends of partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a case of underutilization? Urology. 2006;67:254-259.
29. Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A, et al. Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J Urol. 2009;182:1271-1279.
30. Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
31. HCUP State Inpatient Databases (SID). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008.
32. American Hospital Association. American Hospital Association Annual Survey. Washington, DC: American Hospital Association; 2010.
33. Campbell SC, Lane BR. Malignant Renal Tumors. Volume 11.10th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2012.
34. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, et al. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:8-27.
35. Ulmer WD, Prasad SM, Kowalczyk KJ, et al. Factors associated with the adoption of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in the United States. J Urol. 2012;188:775-780.
36. Bjurlin MA,Walter D, Taksler GB, et al. National trends in the utilization of partial nephrectomy before and after the establishment of AUA guidelines for the management of renal masses. Urology. 2013;82:1283-1289.
37. Kennedy P. A Guide to Econometrics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2003.
38. Preston MA, Blew BD, Breau RH, et al. Survey of senior resident training in urologic laparoscopy, robotics and endourology surgery in Canada. Can Urol Assoc J [Journal de lAssociation des Urologues du Canada]. 2010;4:42-46.
39. Donabedian A, Wheeler JR, Wyszewianski L. Quality, cost, and health: an integrative model. Med Care. 1982;20:975-992.
40. Rubenstein LV, Mittman BS, Yano EM, et al. From understanding health care provider behavior to improving health care: the QUERI framework for quality improvement. Quality Enhancement Research Initiative. Med Care. 2000;38(suppl 1):I129-I141.
41. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA. 1988;260:1743-1748.
42. Stirrat GM. Ethics and evidence based surgery. J Med Ethics. 2004;30:160-165.
43. Melis M, Karl RC, Wong SL, et al. Evidence-based surgical practice in academic medical centers: consistently anecdotal? J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:904-909.
44. Brennan MF. Is nil per os still appropriate for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery?. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;5:660-661.
45. Fendrick AM, Escarce JJ, McLane C, et al. Hospital adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Med Care. 1994;32:1058-1063.
46. Finlayson SR, Laycock WS, Birkmeyer JD. National trends in utilization and outcomes of antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc. 2003;17: 864-867.
47. Escarce JJ, Chen W, Schwartz JS. Falling cholecystectomy thresholds since the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JAMA. 1995;273:1581-1585.
48. Schroeck FR, Kaufman SR, Jacobs BL, et al. The impact of technology diffusion on treatment for prostate cancer. Med Care. 2013;51: 1076-1084.
49. Jacobs BL, Zhang Y, Schroeck FR, et al. Use of advanced treatment technologies among men at low risk of dying from prostate cancer. JAMA. 2013;309:2587-2595.
50. Ellison JS, Montgomery JS, Wolf JS Jr, et al. A matched comparison of perioperative outcomes of a single laparoscopic surgeon versus a multisurgeon robot-Assisted cohort for partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2012;188:45-50.