Patient preferences of cosmesis for abdominal incisions in gynecologic surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate patient preferences insofar as the cosmetic appeal of abdominal incisions used for hysterectomy. We hypothesized that the laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) incision would be preferred cosmetically to traditional multiport laparoscopic incisions and open abdominal incisions via Pfannenstiel, vertical midline, or horizontal mini-laparotomy. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Two gynecology clinics at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina. PATIENTS: Seventy-three women including 50 consecutive women from a private specialty clinic and 23 consecutive women from a resident indigent care clinic. INTERVENTIONS: A brief questionnaire was distributed that assessed preferences via ranking and by using a visual analog scale. Patients were also asked to rate the importance of 4 factors in their decision making: size, location, and number of incisions, and perceived recovery time. Descriptive statistics, t tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and χ(2) tests were used to compare continuous or categorical values. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, the LESS incision was the most preferred incision according to most common choice and visual analog scale scores. In the private clinic, the LESS incision was preferred most often, with 53% of women (39/73) ranking it as their first choice. In the resident clinic, the horizontal mini-laparotomy incision was preferred most often, with 27% of women (20/73) ranking it their first choice. Neither the demographic factors nor any of the factors in decision making explained the difference between the clinics. CONCLUSION: The LESS incision was most preferred in this study. However, the horizontal mini-laparotomy incision and the traditional laparoscopic with low lateral incisions were also highly preferred. Patient perception of the "visibility" of abdominal incisions may be the distinguishing issue to explain the difference in the preferences between the clinics and the differences between the present study and previously published studies of cosmetic preferences.

Cost considerations in the management of cancer in the older patient.

Patients aged 65 years and older represent 12% of the US population yet account for approximately 56% of cancer cases and 69% of all cancer mortalities. The overall cost of cancer in 2005 was $209.9 billion--$74 billion for direct medical costs and $118.4 billion for indirect mortality costs. This paper considers the direct, indirect, and out-of-pocket expenditures incurred by cancer patients > or = 50 years of age. Several major empirical studies on supportive care for older patients and cancer-related costs were reviewed. Insurance coverage, hematologic malignancies, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and cancers of the breast, prostate, colorectum, and lung were evaluated. Major sources of direct medical expenditures covered by third-party insurers for patients aged 65 years and older include extended length of hospital stay, home health assistance following hospital discharge, adjuvant prescription medications, lower-risk treatment (for prostate cancer), and advent of new pharmaceuticals (for colorectal cancer). The mean total direct medical cost for breast cancer is $35,164, and the cumulative cost for prostate cancer is $42,570. Emerging targeted cancer drug costs range from $20,000 to $50,000 annually per patient. Additional clinical trials and cost-effective treatments are needed for older patients to ameliorate the disproportionate economic burden among older individuals with cancer. Additional research about cancer costs may also lead to reforms in cancer care reimbursement, and therefore provide access to affordable health care for older patients.