Direct cost of connecting, maintaining and disconnecting patient-controlled analgesia pump / Custo direto da instalacao, manutencao e desligamento da bomba de analgesia / Costo directo de la instalacion, mantenimiento y detencion de la bomba de analgesia controlada por el paciente

Quantitative research that aimed to identify the mean total cost (MTC) of connecting, maintaining and disconnecting patient-controlled analgesia pump (PCA) in the management of pain. The non-probabilistic sample corresponded to the observation of 81 procedures in 17 units of the Central Institute of the Clinics Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sao Paulo. We calculated the MTC multiplying by the time spent by nurses at a unit cost of direct labor, adding the cost of materials and medications/solutions. The MTC of connecting was R$ 107.91; maintenance R$ 110.55 and disconnecting R$ 4.94. The results found will subsidize discussions about the need to transfer money from the Unified Health System to hospitals units that perform this technique of analgesic therapy and it will contribute to the cost management aimed at making efficient and effective decision-making in the allocation of available resources.

Estudio cuantitativo cuyo fue objetivo identificar el costo total promedio (CTM) de la instalación, mantenimiento y detención de la bomba de analgesia controlada por el paciente (PCA) para el manejo del dolor. La muestra no probabilística correspondió a la observación de 81 procedimientos en 17 unidades del Instituto Central del Hospital de las Clínicas de la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad de São Paulo. Se calculó el CTM multiplicándose el tiempo dedicado por las enfermeras por el costo unitario de la mano de obra directa más el costo de los materiales y medicamentos/soluciones. El CTM de la instalación fue de R$107,91, el del mantenimiento fue de R$ 110,55 y el de la detención de la bomba fue de R$ 4,94. Los resultados pueden contribuir a las discusiones sobre la necesidad de transferir dinero del Sistema Nacional de Salud a las unidades hospitalarias que realizan esta técnica de terapia analgésica y a la gestión de los costos con el fin de favorecer la toma de decisiones eficientes y eficaces respecto al destino de los recursos disponibles.

Pesquisa quantitativa que objetivou identificar o custo total médio (CTM) da instalação, manutenção e desligamento da bomba de analgesia controlada pelo paciente (PCA) no manejo da dor. A amostra não probabilística correspondeu à observação de 81 procedimentos em 17 Unidades do Instituto Central do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. Calculou-se o CTM multiplicando-se o tempo despendido pelas enfermeiras pelo custo unitário da mão de obra direta, somando-se ao custo dos materiais e medicamentos/soluções. O CTM da instalação foi de R$ 107,91; da manutenção R$ 110,55 e do desligamento R$ 4,94. Os resultados obtidos subsidiarão discussões acerca da necessidade de repasse monetário do Sistema Único de Saúde às unidades hospitalares que realizam essa técnica de terapia antálgica e contribuirão para o gerenciamento de custos visando à tomada de decisão eficiente e eficaz na alocação dos recursos disponíveis.

Cost-effectiveness of thoracic patient-controlled epidural analgesia using bupivacaine with fentanyl vs bupivacaine with morphine after thoracotomy and upper abdominal surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and cost of thoracic patient-controlled epidural analgesia (TPCEA) using bupivacaine with fentanyl (BF) vs bupivacaine with morphine (BM) solution. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In a blinded, randomized controlled trial, 90 adult patients who were scheduled for thoracotomy or upper abdominal surgery were enrolled. All patients were anesthetized by a combined general/epidural technique. Intraoperative and postoperative analgesia was provided by TPCEA using bupivacaine 0.0625% with either fentanyl (group BF) or morphine (group BM) solution. The occurrence and severity of side effects, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain at rest and during movement, patients' satisfaction score as well as charged cost of pain and side effect management were recorded for 48 hrs. RESULTS: Demographic data of both groups were not significantly different. No statistical differences were noted with respect to efficacy of pain relief between the 2 groups. Only 28.5% of the patients in group BM required supplemental systemic analgesia within 24 hours after epidural catheter removal compared with 51.4% in the group BE Patients' satisfaction and the severity of epidural analgesia related side effects, using itching and nausea/vomiting score, of both groups were not significantly different except the median nausea/ vomiting scores of group BM at 18 and 24 hours were statistically higher than those of group BF (P = 0.047 and 0.02, at 18 and 24 hour respectively) but not clinically different. The mean charged cost of medication used in group BM (470.64 +/- 160.54 baht) was lower than that in group BF (814.15 +/- 217.51 baht). CONCLUSION: TPCEA using BF and BM solution resulted in similar pain relief and side effect profiles but with higher charged cost of medication in group BF Morphine appears to be a more cost-effective choice than fentanyl for TPCEA after thoracotomy or upper abdominal surgery.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of patient-controlled analgesia, intramuscular q.i.d. injection and p.r.n. injection for postoperative pain relief.

We conclude that the intravenous PCA method is a cost-effective technique. Although the PCA device is expensive, the cost-effectiveness analysis should give explicit figures for physicians and the hospital administrators to decide whether they should use the PCA instead of the conventional method.