Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Comparison of Stereotactic Radiosurgery to Multiple Brain Lesions Using Single-Isocenter Versus Multiple-Isocenter Technique.

Autor:	Parikh NR; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Kundu P; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Levin-Epstein R; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Chang EM; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Agazaryan N; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Hegde JV; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Steinberg ML; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Tenn SE; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California., Kaprealian TB; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: TKaprealian@mednet.ucla.edu.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics [Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys] 2020 Nov 15; Vol. 108 (4), pp. 999-1007. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Jun 27.
DOI:	10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.06.035
Abstrakt:	Purpose: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) historically has been used to treat multiple brain lesions using a multiple-isocenter technique-frequently associated with significant complexity in treatment planning and long treatment times. Recently, given innovations in planning algorithms, patients with multiple brain lesions may now be treated with a single-isocenter technique using fewer total arcs and less time spent during image guidance (though with stricter image guided radiation therapy tolerances). This study used time-driven activity-based costing to determine the difference in cost to a provider for delivering SRS to multiple brain lesions using single-isocenter versus multiple-isocenter techniques. Methods and Materials: Process maps, consisting of discrete steps, were created for each phase of the SRS care cycle and were based on interviews with department personnel. Actual treatment times (including image guidance) were extracted from treatment record and verify software. Additional sources of data to determine costs included salary/benefit data of personnel and average list price/maintenance costs for equipment. Results: Data were collected for 22 patients who underwent single-isocenter SRS (mean lesions treated, 5.2; mean treatment time, 30.2 minutes) and 51 patients who underwent multiple-isocenter SRS (mean lesions treated, 4.4; mean treatment time, 75.2 minutes). Treatment time for multiple-isocenter SRS varied substantially with increasing number of lesions (11.8 minutes/lesion; P < .001), but to a much lesser degree in single-isocenter SRS (1.8 minutes/lesion; P = .029). The resulting cost savings from single-isocenter SRS based on number of lesions treated ranged from $296 to $3878 for 2 to 10 lesions treated. The 2-mm planning treatment volume margin used with single-isocenter SRS resulted in a mean 43% increase of total volume treated compared with a 1-mm planning treatment volume expansion. Conclusions: In a comparison of time-driven activity-based costing assessment of single-isocenter versus multiple-isocenter SRS for multiple brain lesions, single-isocenter SRS appears to save time and resources for as few as 2 lesions, with incremental benefits for additional lesions treated. (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu