Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Separate Anesthesia Induction Rooms on Multidisciplinary Work Flow in Operating Rooms.

Introduction: Operating suites are multidisciplinary units par excellence, and mostly they are the most expensive units in hospitals. Interdisciplinary workflow and efficiency are therefore crucial, which is influenced by floor plans varying from hospital to hospital. Most operating rooms are equipped with adjacent induction rooms, allowing preparation and anesthesia induction of the next patient, while the previous patient is still in the operating room. Parallelizing the working steps is thought to improve turn-over time, thus increasing throughput, number of cases and finally revenue. However, this assumption has never been challenged. Methods: We analyzed workflow during regular working hours in an operating suite equipped with a mixture of operating rooms (OR) with next door induction rooms and operating rooms without induction rooms. This allows a direct comparison of both structural elements for efficiency using utilization data over a 24-months period. Both settings were used for gynecological operations. Results: Key result is that induction rooms do not improve perioperative workflow including turn-over time. Instead, ORs without adjacent induction rooms have a significantly shorter turn-over time and OR occupancy duration per case, although surgical time and staffing were similar. Discussion: Adjacent induction rooms require extra space, funding, and high maintenance costs, but they do not speed up peri-operative processes. Modern anesthetic techniques allow for fast induction of and emergence from anesthesia. Induction rooms adjacent to the OR are no longer needed if general anesthesia without extended monitoring is used for the majority of cases.

[Impact of the Nursing Personnel Strengthening Act on minimally invasive surgery exemplified by right-sided hemicolectomy from an economic perspective]. / Auswirkungen des Pflegepersonalstärkungsgesetzes auf die minimal-invasive Chirurgie am Beispiel der Hemikolektomie rechts aus ökonomischer Perspektive.

BACKGROUND: In the past, a reduced length of postoperative hospital stay was considered a sufficient trade-off to refinance the additional costs associated with minimally invasive surgery; however, with the implementation of the Nursing Personnel Strengthening Act and disincorporation of nursing costs, this argumentation needs to be fundamentally reevaluated. METHOD: Using right-sided hemicolectomy as an example, a retrospective case analysis was conducted. Cost reductions associated with the length of hospital stay were compared before and after the introduction of the revised German diagnosis-related groups (aG-DRG) and offset against the increased material and personnel costs. RESULTS: Among the analyzed cases, the utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques led to a substantial cost reduction per case compared to conventional surgical treatment. After the introduction of the aG-DRGs the financial benefits of a shortened hospital stay are greatly diminished and cannot be used to refinance the expenses necessary to perform minimally invasive surgery. From a strictly economical perspective, there is a strong incentive to only perform open surgical procedures. CONCLUSION: Disincorporation of nursing costs has destabilized the fragile concept of indirect refinancing of advanced operative techniques by the financial incentives associated with a shorter hospital stay. In order to comply with statutory regulations to implicate a performance-based funding, there is an urgent necessity to adjust the grouping algorithms for minimally invasive surgical procedures to the corresponding flat rates.

The Recovery Room: Transition from a Sleepy Postoperative Unit to a Vibrant and Cost-Effective Multipurpose Perioperative Care Unit.

The anesthesiologist, who traditionally was solely responsible for the intra- and postoperative care of patients, has undergone a transformation over the last decades and has emerged as a specialist for perioperative medicine. This includes preoperative assessment, preoperative stabilization of emergent cases, pre- or postoperative initiation of regional blocks, postoperative recovery and if needed postoperative intensive care outside the intensive care unit. A traditional recovery room, designated to take care of patients emerging from anesthesia only, no longer matches the modern anesthesiologist's demands. However, a traditional recovery room can easily be transformed into a vibrant multi-purpose perioperative care unit. Especially in smaller hospitals, this serves to match the anesthesiologist's demands without the financial burden of separate units for each task. On the contrary, it allows to transform the recovery room from a mandatory, but costly postoperative unit into a highly productive and demanding perioperative unit, allowing for extra revenues without corresponding costs. Worldwide, operating rooms are linked to an adjacent recovery room allowing patients to emerge from anesthesia until they fulfill the criteria to be transferred either to the regular ward or, in case of outpatient surgery, to be discharged home. Running these recovery rooms, however, is expensive due to the required technical equipment and the monthly costs of highly qualified anesthesia personnel. Despite these financial burdens, such recovery rooms are still mandatory to ensure full recovery after anesthesia and surgery. In most countries, there is no (full) reimbursement for providing recovery rooms, turning them into fiscally deficient units in most hospitals. However, recovery rooms can be further developed allowing hospitals to improve their caseloads, reduce turnover times in the operating room, and even help to manage a shortage of beds in the intensive care unit. In this paper, we describe the potential transformation from a traditional recovery room to a multi-purpose perioperative high-tech unit.