RESUMO
Background The coronavirus pandemic has caused global disruption to all aspects of life. This disturbance has been most notable in the medical world. Political, societal, medical, and behavioral alterations have forced emergency surgical practices to adapt. This study investigated the impact of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) at a busy surgical center. Methodology This is a retrospective observational study. Three study periods were analyzed: pre-COVID, first wave, and second wave. Data were collected on referrals, diagnoses, investigations, management pathways, outcomes, patient behavior, and consultant practice. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA test) was used for the analysis of parametric data and the Mann-Whitney U test for non-parametric data. Results Declining numbers of patients presented across the three periods. There was a severe disruption in performing emergency general surgeries during the first wave, propagated by alterations in clinical decision-making, as well as fluctuations in societal and patient behavior. Despite the effects of the second wave being significantly more profound in terms of hospitalization and COVID-related mortality, a paradoxical, gradual return to the norm was noted, which was seen in referral pathways, imaging decisions, and management strategies. Conclusion Our data is suggestive of society, both within and outside the medical sphere, adjusting to life with COVID-19.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To perform a cost analysis comparing the cost of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open RC (ORC) in a UK tertiary referral centre and to identify the key cost drivers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time (OT), transfusion rate, and volume and complication rate were obtained from a prospectively updated institutional database for patients undergoing RARC or ORC. A cost decision tree model was created. Sensitivity analysis was performed to find key drivers of overall cost and to find breakeven points with ORC. Monte Carlo analysis was performed to quantify the variability in the dataset. RESULTS: One RARC procedure costs £12 449.87, or £12 106.12 if the robot was donated via charitable funds. In comparison, one ORC procedure costs £10 474.54. RARC is 18.9% more expensive than ORC. The key cost drivers were OT, LOS, and the number of cases performed per annum. CONCLUSION: High ongoing equipment costs remain a large barrier to the cost of RARC falling. However, minimal improvements in patient quality of life would be required to offset this difference.
