Changes in Patterns of Radical Prostatectomy due to Diffusion of Robotic Surgical System: A Nationwide Study Using Health Insurance Claims Data

Purpose@#This study analyzed the changes in the number of surgeries and surgical patterns due to the adoption and diffusion of new medical technology while focusing on radical prostatectomy. @*Materials and Methods@#Medical equipment status report data and the National Health Insurance claims data from 2007 to 2019 were used. A total of 62798 radical prostatectomies from 135 medical facilities were analyzed. Radical prostatectomy was classified into open radical prostatectomy (ORP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the fee schedule codes. A linear mixed model was used to determine whether the adoption of a robotic surgical system had an effect on the number of surgeries and surgical patterns after adjusting for medical characteristics. @*Results@#The number of radical prostatectomies performed in Korea increased from 1756 in 2007 to 8475 in 2019. During this period, the proportion of RARP in total surgery increased from 17.5% to 74.3%. The mean number of surgeries at medical facilities adopting the robotic surgical system was 128.3, which was higher compared to 18.5 cases in medical facilities that did not adopt it. The adoption of a robotic surgical system increased the number of radical prostatectomy surgeries by 12.1 cases and the RARP share by 47.2% in a linear mixed model.  @*Conclusion@#The adoption and diffusion of robotic surgical systems in Korea increased the number of surgeries as well as the share of robotic surgery. It is necessary to manage a technology that is widely used in a state where its clinical effectiveness is uncertain.

Implications of Price Setting Strategies for New Health Technologies from Five Countries / 보건행정학회지

This study aims to compare the experience of selected countries in operating separate payment system for new healthcare technology and to find implications for price setting in Korea. We analyzed the related reports, papers, laws, regulations, and related agencies’ online materials from five selected countries including the United States, Japan, Taiwan, Germany, and France. Each country has its own additional payment system for new technologies: transitional pass-through payment and new technology ambulatory payment classification for outpatient care and new technology add-on payment for inpatient care (USA), an extra payment for materials with new functions or new treatment (C1, C2; Japan), an additional payment system for new special treatment materials (Taiwan), a short-term extra funding for new diagnosis and treatment (NUB; Germany), and list of additional payments for new medical devices (France). The technology should be proven safe and effective in order to get approval for an additional payment. The price is determined by considering the actual cost of providing the technology and the cost of existing similar technologies listed in the benefits package. The revision cycle of the additional payment is 1 to 4 years. The cost or usage is monitored during that period and then integrated into the existing fee schedule or removed from the list. We conclude that it is important to set the explicit criteria to select services eligible for additional payment, to collect and analyze data to assess eligibility and to set the payment, to monitor the usage or cost, and to make follow-up measures in price setting for new health technologies in Korea.

Impact of Selective Health Benefit on Medical Expenditure and Provider Behavior: Case of Gastric Cancer Surgery / 보건행정학회지

BACKGROUND: Selective health benefit was introduced for decreasing economic burden of patients. Medical devices with economic uncertainty have been covered as selective health benefit by National Health Insurance since December 2013. We aimed to analyze impact of selective health benefit to medical expenditure and provider behavior focused on electrosurgery Cultrasonic shears, electrothermal bipolar vessel sealers for gastric cancer patients covered since December 2014. METHODS: We used the National Health Insurance claims data of 2,698 patients underwent gastric cancer surgery between August 2014 and March 2015. Medical cost and patient sharing per inpatient day were analyzed to verify that covering electrosurgery increased medical expenditure and changed provider behavior from open surgery to endoscopic or laparoscopic surgery. Additionally, we analyzed the claim rate of medical device or goods relating gastric endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: Medical cost and patient sharing per inpatient day were increased after covering electosurgery as selective health benefit (39,724/1,421 won). However, there were no medical expenditure increases after adjusting claim of electosurgery and patient sharing was decreased 1,057 won especially. The coverage of selective health benefit did not increase the claim rate of medical device or goods related endoscopic or laparoscopic surgery, either. CONCLUSION: Covering electosurgery decreased patient economic burden and did not change of provider behavior. Expanding selective health benefit is needed to decrease economic burden of severe patients. Further study should evaluate the long term effect with accumulated data.