Premium
Optimizing cost‐effectiveness in perioperative care for liver transplantation: A model for low‐ to medium‐income countries
Author(s) -
Rando Karina,
Niemann Claus U.,
Taura Pilar,
Klinck John
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
liver transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.814
H-Index - 150
eISSN - 1527-6473
pISSN - 1527-6465
DOI - 10.1002/lt.22405
Subject(s) - medicine , context (archaeology) , perioperative , modalities , health care , liver transplantation , intensive care medicine , medline , evidence based practice , transplantation , surgery , economic growth , alternative medicine , pathology , sociology , political science , law , economics , biology , paleontology , social science
Although liver transplantation (LT) is a highly effective treatment, it has been considered too costly for publicly funded health systems in many countries with low to medium average incomes. However, with economic growth and improving results, some governments are reconsidering this position. Cost‐effectiveness data for LT are limited, especially in perioperative care, and the techniques and costs vary widely between centers without overt differences in outcomes. Anesthesiologists working in new programs find it difficult to determine which modalities are essential, which are needed only in exceptional circumstances, and which may be omitted without effects on outcomes. We investigated key elements of preoperative evaluations, intraoperative management, and early postoperative care that might significantly affect costs in order to develop a best‐value approach for new programs in resource‐limited health systems. We identified all modalities of care commonly used in anesthesia and perioperative care for adult LT along with their costs. Those considered to be universally accepted as minimum requirements for safe care were excluded from the analysis, and so were those considered to be safe and low‐cost, even when evidence of efficacy was lacking. The remaining items were, therefore, those with uncertain or context‐restricted value and significant costs. A systematic review of the published evidence, practice surveys, and institutional guidelines was performed, and the evidence was graded and summarized. With respect to costs and benefits, each modality was then cited as strongly recommended, recommended or optional, or no recommendation was made because of insufficient evidence. Sixteen modalities, which included preoperative cardiovascular imaging, venovenous bypass, pulmonary artery catheterization, high‐flow fluid warming devices, drug therapies for hemostasis, albumin, cell salvage, anesthetic drugs, personnel (staffing) requirements, and early extubation, were assessed. Only high‐flow fluid warming was strongly recommended. The recommended modalities included preoperative echocardiography, cell salvage, tranexamic acid and early extubation. Six others were rated optional, and there was insufficient evidence for 5 modalities. We conclude that some costly techniques and treatments can be omitted without adverse effects on outcomes. Liver Transpl 17:1247–1278, 2011. © 2011 AASLD.