Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Medical Research
Published in: European Journal of Medical Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Is it time to rebalance the case mix? A portfolio analysis of direct catheterization laboratory costs over a 5-year period

Authors: Gunnar Plehn, Thomas Butz, Petra Maagh, Ahmet Oernek, Axel Meissner, Natalie Plehn

Published in: European Journal of Medical Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Cardiac catheterization laboratories (CLL) have continued to function as profit centers for hospitals. Due to a high percentage of material and labor costs, they are natural targets for process improvement. Our study applied a contribution margin (CBM) concept to evaluate costs and cost dynamics over a 5-year period.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed all procedures performed at a tertiary heart center between 2007 and 2011. Total variable costs, including labor time, material, and maintenance-expenses, were allocated at a global as well as a procedural level. CBM and CBM ratios were calculated by integration of individual DRG revenues.

Results

Annual case volume increased from 1288 to 1545. In parallel, overall profitability improved as indicated by a 2% increase in CBM ratio and a higher CBM generated per hour of CLL working time (4325 vs. 5892 €, p < 0.001). Coronary angiography generated higher average CBMs per hour than coronary or electrophysiological interventions (5831 vs. 3458 vs. 1495 €; p < 0.001). The latter are characterized by relatively high per case material expenditures. On a procedural level, DRG-specific trends as a steady improvement of examination time or an increase in material costs were detectable.

Conclusions

The CBM concept allows a comprehensive analysis of CLL costs and cost dynamics. From a health service providers view, its range of application includes global profitability analysis, portfolio evaluation, and a detailed cost analysis of specific service lines. From a healthcare payers perspective, it may help to monitor hospital activities and to provide a solid data basis in cases where inappropriate developments are suspected. The calculation principle is simple which may increase user acceptance and thus the motivation of team members.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Horwitz JR. Making profits and providing care: comparing nonprofit, for-profit, and government hospitals. Health Aff. 2005;24(3):790–801.CrossRef
2.
LeBlanc F, McLauglin S, Freedman J, Sager R, Weissman M. A six sigma approach to maximizing productivity in the cardiac cath lab. J Cardiovasc Manag. 2004;15(2):19–24.PubMed
3.
Mang H, Kunzmann U, Bauer M. Diagnosis-related groups. Safeguarding and distribution of revenues from the perspective of anaesthesiology. Anaesthesist. 2007;56(9):867–76.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Mercuri M, Natarajan MK, Holder DH, Xie C, Gafni A. Insight into capacity planning for cardiac catheterization services: policy lessons learned from “looking in the mirror” over a decade. Health Policy. 2009;91(3):314–20.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Gupta D, Natarajan MK, Gafni A, Wang L, Shilton D, Holder D, Yusuf S. Capacity planning for cardiac catheterization: a case study. Health Policy. 2007;82(1):1–11.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Plehn G, Örnek A, Gkiouras G, Vormbrock J, Maagh P, Butz T, Meissner A. Transradial versus transfemoral approach in coronary angiography: a matched pair analysis of cath lab equipment costs. J Vasc Access. 2015;16(5):413–7.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Plehn G, Oernek A, Vormbrock J, Maagh P, Butz T, Meissner A. Comparison of costs and revenues in conservative and invasive treatment in cardiology: a contribution margin analysis. Gesundheitswesen. 2015. doi:10.​1055/​s-0041-110672.PubMed
8.
Procter L, Bernard AC, Korosec RL, Chipko PL, Kearney PA Jr, Zwischenberger JB. An acute care surgery service generates a positive contribution margin in an appropriately staffed hospital. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:298–301.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Kasch R, Assmann G, Merk S, Barz T, Melloh M, Hofer A, Merk H, Flessa S. Economic analysis of two-stage septic revision after total hip arthroplasty: what are the relevant costs for the hospital’s orthopedic department? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:112.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Berens W, Lachmann M, Wömpener A. Instruments of management accounting in German hospitals—potentials for competitive advantage and status quo. Gesundheitswesen. 2011;73(3):e51–60.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Henneman PL, Nathanson BH, Li H, Blank FS, Santoro JP, Maynard AM, et al. Emergency department patients who stay more than 6 hours contribute to crowding. J Emerg Med. 2010;39(1):105–12.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Tan SS, Bakker J, Hoogendoorn ME, Kapila A, Martin J, Pezzi A, Pittoni G, Spronk PE, Welte R, Hakkaart-van Roijen L. Direct cost analysis of intensive care unit stay in four European countries: applying a standardized costing methodology. Value Health. 2012;15(1):81–6.CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
Cohen DJ, Becker ER, Culler SD, Ellis S, Green LM, Schnitzler RN, Simon AW, Weintraub WS. Impact of patient characteristics, complications, and facility volume on the costs and time of cardiac catheterization and coronary angioplasty in 70 catheterization laboratories. Am J Cardiol. 2000;15(86):595.CrossRef
15.
Stepaniak PS, Soliman Hamad MA, Dekker LR, Koolen JJ. Improving the efficiency of the cardiac catheterization laboratories through understanding the stochastic behavior of the scheduled procedures. Cardiol J. 2014;21(4):343–9.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Tan SS, Geissler A, Serdén L, Heurgren M, van Ineveld BM, Redekop WK, Hakkaart-van Roijen L, EuroDRG group. DRG systems in Europe: variations in cost accounting systems among 12 countries. Eur J Public Health. 2014;24(6):1023–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Geissler A, Scheller-Kreinsen D, Busse R. Germany: Understanding G-DRGs. In: Busse R, Geissler A, Quentin W, Wiley M, editors. Diagnosis-related groups in Europe: moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals. Maidenhead: Open University Press and WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2011.
18.
Becker ER, Cohen D, Culler SD, Ellis S, Green LM, Schnitzler RN, Simon A, Weintraub WS. Benchmarking cardiac catheterization laboratories: the impact of patient age, gender and risk factors on variable costs, device costs, total time and procedural time in 53 catheterization laboratories. J Invasive Cardiol. 1999;11(9):533–42.PubMed
19.
Heidenreich PA, Chou TM, Amidon TM, Ports TA, Browner WS. Impact of the operating physician on costs of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1996;77(14):1169–73.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Winkle RA, Mead RH, Engel G, Kong MH, Patrawala RA. Physician-controlled costs: the choice of equipment used for atrial fibrillation ablation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2013;36(2):157–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Hultman CS. Procedural portfolio planning in plastic surgery, part 2: collaboration between surgeons and hospital administrators to develop a funds flow model for procedures performed at an academic medical center. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(Suppl 4):S347–51.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Hultman CS. procedural portfolio planning in plastic surgery, part 1: strategic changes in clinical practice to increase physician revenue, improve operative throughput, and maintain patient satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(Suppl 4):S344–6.CrossRefPubMed
23.
24.
25.
Geissler A, Quentin W, Busse R. Do German DRGs appropriately explain the resource consumption of hospitals? An empirical patient-level cost-data analysis across ten episodes of care. Gesundheitswesen. 2014;76(5):284–96.PubMed
26.
Busse R, EuroDRG group. Do diagnosis-related groups explain variations in hospital costs and length of stay? Analyses from the EuroDRG project for 10 episodes of care across 10 European countries. Health Econ. 2012;21(Suppl 2):1–5.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Is it time to rebalance the case mix? A portfolio analysis of direct catheterization laboratory costs over a 5-year period
Authors
Gunnar Plehn
Thomas Butz
Petra Maagh
Ahmet Oernek
Axel Meissner
Natalie Plehn
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2047-783X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-016-0238-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

European Journal of Medical Research 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

Reduction and stabilization of radial neck fractures by intramedullary pinning: a technique not only for children

Research

An update on the clinical diagnostic value of β-hCG and αFP for intracranial germ cell tumors

Research

Minimal invasive annulotomy for induction of disc degeneration and implantation of poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) plugs for annular repair in a rabbit model

Research

Modified Hughes procedure for reconstruction of large full-thickness lower eyelid defects following tumor resection

Research

How rapid is rapid? Exemplary results of real-life rapid rule-out troponin timing in troponin-positive acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation in two contrasting German chest pain unit facilities

Research

Cytokine and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) profile for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after organ transplantation