Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 2;7(1):e2352917.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.52917.

Awake Craniotomy Program Implementation

Affiliations

Awake Craniotomy Program Implementation

Diogo Moniz-Garcia et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Implementing multidisciplinary teams for treatment of complex brain tumors needing awake craniotomies is associated with significant costs. To date, there is a paucity of analysis on the cost utility of introducing advanced multidisciplinary standardized teams to enable awake craniotomies.

Objective: To assess the cost utility of introducing a standardized program of awake craniotomies.

Design, setting, and participants: A retrospective economic evaluation was conducted at Mayo Clinic Florida. All patients with single, unilateral lesions who underwent elective awake craniotomies between January 2016 and December 2021 were considered eligible for inclusion. The economic perspective of the health care institution and a time horizon of 1 year were considered. Data were analyzed from October 2022 to May 2023.

Exposure: Treatment with an awake craniotomy before standardization (2016-2018) compared with treatment with awake craniotomy after standardization (2018-2021).

Main outcomes and measures: Patient demographics, perioperative, and postoperative outcomes, including length of stay, intensive care (ICU) admission, extent of resection, readmission rates, and 1-year mortality were compared between patients undergoing surgery before and after standardization. Direct medical costs were estimated from Medicare reimbursement rates for all billed procedures. A cost-utility analysis was performed considering differences in direct medical costs and in 1-year mortality within the periods before and after standardization of procedures. Uncertainty was explored in probability sensitivity analysis.

Results: A total of 164 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.9 [15.7] years; 98 [60%] male patients) were included in the study. Of those, 56 underwent surgery before and 108 after implementation of procedure standardization. Procedure standardization was associated with reductions in length of stay from a mean (SD) of 3.34 (1.79) to 2.46 (1.61) days (difference, 0.88 days; 95% CI, 0.33-1.42 days; P = .002), length of stay in ICU from a mean (SD) of 1.32 (0.69) to 0.99 (0.90) nights (difference, 0.33 nights; 95% CI, 0.06-0.60 nights; P = .02), 30-day readmission rate from 14% (8 patients) in the prestandardization cohort to 5% (5 patients) (difference, 9%; 95% CI, 19.6%-0.3%; P = .03), while extent of resection and intraoperative complication rates were similar between both cohorts. The standardized protocol was associated with mean (SD) savings of $7088.80 ($12 389.50) and decreases in 1-year mortality (dominant intervention). This protocol was found to be cost saving in 75.5% of all simulations in probability sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions and relevance: In this economic evaluation of standardization of awake craniotomy, there was a generalized reduction in length of stay, ICU admission time, and direct medical costs with implementation of an optimized protocol. This was achieved without compromising patient outcomes and with similar extent of resection, complication rates, and reduced readmission rates.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Scatterplot of Sensitivity Analysis
Scatterplot illustrating the results of probabilistic sensitivity analysis comparing A, cohort before and after standardization of protocols, and B, subcohort, restricted to gliomas and matched before and after standardization. Each dot corresponds to the result of 1 simulation (ie, 1 comparison between both cohorts); the location of each dot in the vertical axis indicates the difference in costs between both cohorts for the respective simulation, while its location in the horizontal axis indicates the difference in 1-year survival.

References

    1. Elder JB, Hoh DJ, Oh BC, Heller AC, Liu CY, Apuzzo ML. The future of cerebral surgery: a kaleidoscope of opportunities. Neurosurgery. 2008;62(6)(suppl 3):1555-1579. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000316426.13241.A9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sughrue ME, Bonney PA, Choi L, Teo C. Early discharge after surgery for intra-axial brain tumors. World Neurosurg. 2015;84(2):505-510. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2015.04.019 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ibrahim GM, Bernstein M. Awake craniotomy for supratentorial gliomas: why, when and how? CNS Oncol. 2012;1(1):71-83. doi:10.2217/cns.12.1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apuzzo ML, Elder JB, Liu CY. The metamorphosis of neurological surgery and the reinvention of the neurosurgeon. Neurosurgery. 2009;64(5):788-794. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000346651.35266.65 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garcia D, Akinduro OO, De Biase G, et al. . Robotic-assisted vs nonrobotic-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a cost-utility analysis. Neurosurgery. 2022;90(2):192-198. doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001779 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types