Display options
Share it on

Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021 Oct 26;6(1):e000763. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2021-000763. eCollection 2021.

Cost-effectiveness of direct discharge from the emergency department of patients with simple stable injuries in the Netherlands.

Trauma surgery & acute care open

Thijs H Geerdink, Niek J Geerdink, Johanna M van Dongen, Robert Haverlag, J Carel Goslings, Ruben N van Veen,

Affiliations

  1. Department of Trauma Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  2. Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  3. Department of Health Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

PMID: 34722930 PMCID: PMC8549675 DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2021-000763

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Approximately one-third of musculoskeletal injuries are simple stable injuries (SSIs). Direct discharge (DD) from the emergency department (ED) of patients with SSIs reduces healthcare utilization, without compromising patient outcome and experience, when compared with "traditional" care with routine follow-up. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of DD compared with traditional care from a societal perspective.

METHODS: Societal costs, including healthcare, work absenteeism, and travel costs, were calculated for patients with an SSI, 6 months before (pre-DD cohort) and after implementation of DD (DD cohort). The pre-DD cohort was treated according to local protocols. The DD cohort was treated using orthoses, discharge leaflet, smartphone application, and telephone helpline, without scheduling routine follow-up. Effect measures included generic health-related quality of life (HR-QoL; EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire); disease-specific HR-QoL (functional outcome, different validated questionnaires, converted to 0-100 scale); treatment satisfaction (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), 1-10); and pain (VAS, 1-10). All data were assessed using a 3-month postinjury survey and electronic patient records. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and uncertainty was assessed using bootstrapping techniques.

RESULTS: Before DD, 144 of 348 participants completed the survey versus 153 of 371 patients thereafter. There were no statistically significant differences between the pre-DD cohort and the DD cohort for generic HR-QoL (0.03; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.08), disease-specific HR-QoL (4.4; 95% CI -1.1 to 9.9), pain (0.08; 95% CI -0.37 to 0.52) and treatment satisfaction (-0.16; 95% CI -0.53 to 0.21). Total societal costs were lowest in the DD cohort (-€822; 95% CI -€1719 to -€67), including healthcare costs (-€168; 95% CI -€205 to -€131) and absenteeism costs (-€645; 95% CI -€1535 to €100). The probability of DD being cost-effective was 0.98 at a willingness-to-pay of €0 for all effect measures, remaining high with increasing willingness-to-pay for generic HR-QoL, disease-specific HR-QoL, and pain, and decreasing with increasing willingness-to-pay for treatment satisfaction.

DISCUSSION: DD from the ED of patients with SSI seems cost-effective from a societal perspective. Future studies should test generalizability in other healthcare systems and strengthen findings in larger injury-specific cohorts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Keywords: cost-benefit analysis; efficiency; fracture; patient satisfaction

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

  1. Br J Sports Med. 2020 May;54(9):538-545 - PubMed
  2. Injury. 2017 Mar;48(3):720-723 - PubMed
  3. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021 Apr 14;6(1):e000709 - PubMed
  4. Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36 - PubMed
  5. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2018 Oct;43(8):893-894 - PubMed
  6. Injury. 2017 Oct;48(10):2101-2105 - PubMed
  7. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Feb 22;10:22 - PubMed
  8. Injury. 2019 Apr;50(4):898-902 - PubMed
  9. Qual Life Res. 2010 Aug;19(6):875-86 - PubMed
  10. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Mar;23(3):297-301 - PubMed
  11. Injury. 2015 Aug;46(8):1664-8 - PubMed
  12. Ir Med J. 2015 Apr;108(4):117 - PubMed
  13. Br J Sports Med. 2019 Feb;53(3):172-181 - PubMed
  14. Med Decis Making. 1990 Jul-Sep;10(3):212-4 - PubMed
  15. J Cancer Surviv. 2019 Aug;13(4):558-569 - PubMed
  16. J Trauma Manag Outcomes. 2014 Dec 10;8(1):21 - PubMed
  17. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 May;87(5):1038-46 - PubMed
  18. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005 Jul 9;149(28):1574-8 - PubMed
  19. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2020 Sep;45(7):748-753 - PubMed
  20. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2014 May;75(5):287-9 - PubMed
  21. Qual Life Res. 2014 Aug;23(6):1733-41 - PubMed
  22. BMJ Open. 2014 Jun 13;4(6):e005282 - PubMed
  23. Bone Joint J. 2013 Dec;95-B(12):1714-20 - PubMed
  24. Health Econ. 2004 May;13(5):405-15 - PubMed
  25. Health Econ. 2004 May;13(5):461-75 - PubMed
  26. Eur Spine J. 2016 Jul;25(7):2087-96 - PubMed
  27. Bone Joint J. 2017 Apr;99-B(4):503-507 - PubMed
  28. Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):343-52 - PubMed
  29. Pediatr Qual Saf. 2019 Nov 25;4(6):e202 - PubMed
  30. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2019;35(4):307-316 - PubMed
  31. Injury. 2017 Jul;48(7):1355-1362 - PubMed
  32. Bone Joint J. 2018 Jul;100-B(7):959-965 - PubMed
  33. Injury. 2017 Apr;48(4):966-970 - PubMed
  34. Hand (N Y). 2015 Dec;10(4):607-12 - PubMed
  35. Phys Ther. 1999 Apr;79(4):371-83 - PubMed
  36. Ir J Med Sci. 2019 May;188(2):371-377 - PubMed
  37. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2020 Feb 25;164: - PubMed

Publication Types