BN SO34 - Outcomes in giant versus non-giant hiatus hernia repair: Same payment different operative burden

Abstract Background Hospital trust payment for operative procedures often rely on coding systems like the NHS's Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) codes, which determine reimbursement rates. Both giant hiatus hernia (GHH) and non-giant hiatus hernia (NGHH) repairs often share the same code, as in our trust. This results in equal reimbursement to trusts for procedures with higher operative burden and resource needs. This study aims to assess differences in the patient population, their hiatal type, operative challenges and post-operative outcomes between GHH and NGHH repairs. Method All patients undergoing primary hiatus hernia surgery between March 2019 to March 2024 at a single institution were included. Retrospective review of electronic records were utilised to record: patient demographics, hernia type, operative details, length of stay (LOS), post-operative course and need for a return to theatre (RTT). Outcomes were comparison of surgical approach, use of mesh and gastropexy (as proxy measures to indicate difficulty of operation), 30-day morbidity measured using Clavien-Dindo (CD) grading and 30-day mortality and RTT. Analysis was undertaken using un-paired t-test and Chi2. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Table 1. Patients GHH NGHH p n 91 135 Age (average) 69 (±10) 52 (±16) <0.001 Female (%) 66.7 55.2 0.1100 BMI 30.8 (±5.4) 30.7 (±7.8) 0.2029 ASA grade (average) 2.2 1.9 <0.001 Hernia Types (median) 3 1 <0.001 Table 2. Operative details GHH NGHH p Open (%) 6.6 0 0.0020 Laparoscopic (%) 60.4 62.24 0.9840 Robotic (%) 33 33.3 0.9239 Mesh used (%) 8.8 0.7 <0.041 Gastropexy (%) 12 0.7 <0.001 Table 3. Outcomes GHH NGHH p LOS (median) 2 (0-161) 1 (0-8) 0.0179 RTT (%) 10.7 8 0.4747 30-day morbidity (CD≥3, %) 4.8 4.4 0.6519 30-day mortality 0 0 NA Conclusion This study highlights significant differences between giant hiatus hernia (GHH) and non-giant hiatus hernia (NGHH) repairs. GHH repairs have an increased likelihood of undergoing open procedures, use of mesh, and gastropexy, reflecting their greater complexity. GHH patients are older, have higher ASA grades, and present with more advanced hernia types compared to NGHH patients. Additionally, GHH repairs result in longer hospital stays. The findings underscore the need for improved coding accuracy to reflect these disparities accurately in patient demographics, operative strategies, and recovery outcomes within hospital trusts, ensuring appropriate resource allocation and reimbursement based on procedural complexity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British journal of surgery
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae271.205
Primary Topic
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

BN SO34 - Outcomes in giant versus non-giant hiatus hernia repair: Same payment different operative burden

Vinod Menon, Tyrrel Fernando, Thomas Thorne, Yashashwi Sinha et al.
British journal of surgery
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
article

BN SO34 - Outcomes in giant versus non-giant hiatus hernia repair: Same payment different operative burden

Vinod Menon, Tyrrel Fernando, Thomas Thorne, Yashashwi Sinha, Khalid Akbari, Lam Chin Tan, Euan McLaughlin, Caitlin Howey, Saroop Nandra
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Hospital trust payment for operative procedures often rely on coding systems like the NHS's Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) codes, which determine reimbursement rates. Both giant hiatus hernia (GHH) and non-giant hiatus hernia (NGHH) repairs often share the same code, as in our trust. This results in equal reimbursement to trusts for procedures with higher operative burden and resource needs. This study aims to assess differences in the patient population, their hiatal type, operative challenges and post-operative outcomes between GHH and NGHH repairs. Method All patients undergoing primary hiatus hernia surgery between March 2019 to March 2024 at a single institution were included. Retrospective review of electronic records were utilised to record: patient demographics, hernia type, operative details, length of stay (LOS), post-operative course and need for a return to theatre (RTT). Outcomes were comparison of surgical approach, use of mesh and gastropexy (as proxy measures to indicate difficulty of operation), 30-day morbidity measured using Clavien-Dindo (CD) grading and 30-day mortality and RTT. Analysis was undertaken using un-paired t-test and Chi2. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Table 1. Patients GHH NGHH p n 91 135 Age (average) 69 (±10) 52 (±16) <0.001 Female (%) 66.7 55.2 0.1100 BMI 30.8 (±5.4) 30.7 (±7.8) 0.2029 ASA grade (average) 2.2 1.9 <0.001 Hernia Types (median) 3 1 <0.001 Table 2. Operative details GHH NGHH p Open (%) 6.6 0 0.0020 Laparoscopic (%) 60.4 62.24 0.9840 Robotic (%) 33 33.3 0.9239 Mesh used (%) 8.8 0.7 <0.041 Gastropexy (%) 12 0.7 <0.001 Table 3. Outcomes GHH NGHH p LOS (median) 2 (0-161) 1 (0-8) 0.0179 RTT (%) 10.7 8 0.4747 30-day morbidity (CD≥3, %) 4.8 4.4 0.6519 30-day mortality 0 0 NA Conclusion This study highlights significant differences between giant hiatus hernia (GHH) and non-giant hiatus hernia (NGHH) repairs. GHH repairs have an increased likelihood of undergoing open procedures, use of mesh, and gastropexy, reflecting their greater complexity. GHH patients are older, have higher ASA grades, and present with more advanced hernia types compared to NGHH patients. Additionally, GHH repairs result in longer hospital stays. The findings underscore the need for improved coding accuracy to reflect these disparities accurately in patient demographics, operative strategies, and recovery outcomes within hospital trusts, ensuring appropriate resource allocation and reimbursement based on procedural complexity.

British journal of surgeryVol. 111(Supplement_9)
University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust (GB), University of Warwick (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.