You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Epidemiology & Natural History III1 Apr 2014MP78-18 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ROBOTIC AND OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY ON PATIENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES Will Lowrance, Coral Swartz, James Eastham, and Elena Elkin Will LowranceWill Lowrance More articles by this author , Coral SwartzCoral Swartz More articles by this author , James EasthamJames Eastham More articles by this author , and Elena ElkinElena Elkin More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.2501AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) have similar clinical and functional outcomes. RALP is more expensive than ORP, but it is not clear whether subsequent postoperative costs vary. We assessed the economic impact of RALP and ORP on patients and their families in the year following surgery. METHODS We recruited ORP and RALP patients planning surgery for stage T1-T2 prostate cancer at an academic cancer center. Economic impact questionnaires were completed at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The self-administered survey included items regarding the use and cost of health services and supplies, health insurance coverage and employment, and changes in the patient’s and his family’s finances since prostate cancer surgery. RESULTS Between June 2010 and September 2013, 441 of 584 eligible patients consented (76% response rate), and 205 completed a 12-month assessment, of whom 39% had ORP and 61% had RALP. All patients had health insurance. Of 179 men (87%) who reported any new prescription medications since surgery, 12% said insurance did not cover any of the cost of those medications. Of 173 men (84%) who reported new use of incontinence pads, 75% had no insurance coverage for those costs and 23% were uncertain. Of 159 men who were working full- or part-time before surgery, 6% did not return to work after prostatectomy, 36% missed more than 4 weeks of work and 19% had no paid sick days. Approximately 22% of men said their monthly income was lower and 45% said their monthly expenses were greater than before surgery. Almost 88% of men said that since surgery they spent money on hospital, physician or other provider bills, medications, supplies or alternative therapies. About 37% said that since surgery they or their families had to downscale their lifestyle, not pay bills or pay them late, or use money from savings. Nearly 21% of men reported visiting an emergency department at least once in the 12 months following prostatectomy. Comparing men who had RALP vs. ORP, there were no statistically significant differences in their reports of new prescriptions, pad use, return to work, use of sick days, or other postoperative expenses or health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS Both RALP and ORP are associated with an economic burden on patients and their families, and many postoperative costs are not covered by health insurance. Neither approach appears to have an economic advantage from the patient perspective. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e927-e928 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Will Lowrance More articles by this author Coral Swartz More articles by this author James Eastham More articles by this author Elena Elkin More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract