Subscribe to RSS

DOI: 10.1055/a-2376-9748
Structural Requirements for the Outpatient Treatment of Benign Diseases of the Uterus
Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Abstract
In many cases, outpatient surgical treatment of benign diseases of the uterus has advantages over inpatient care. This has been demonstrated by the healthcare situation in other countries. However, the prerequisite for the provision of outpatient services is that this does not lead to any impairment in the quality of care or of patient safety. The ultimate goal should not be to reduce costs but rather to maintain and, ideally, improve the quality of care. This requires that services are not just defined by the surgical procedure but also by the entire treatment chain, including, for example, psychosocial support, and are remunerated accordingly. It is particularly worrying that the final decision as to whether an outpatient operation is possible is not the responsibility of the operating unit, but of the “Medizinischer Dienst,” with the corresponding options and threats of sanctions. This situation is unique internationally and requires a paradigm shift. Furthermore, structural prerequisites must be maintained which currently only exist inadequately in Germany. Since a substantial proportion of planned outpatient operations require immediate or secondary inpatient treatment, there must be a barrier-free transition between the outpatient and inpatient sectors. This will require the creation of networks between outpatient service providers and one or more hospitals that are equipped and competent to manage even complex complications. It is important to create structures that, with intensive involvement of the operating unit, include adequate preoperative evaluation and patient education as well as needs-oriented postoperative care at home. The current separation of sectors is a significant hinderance. Moreover, when expanding and promoting outpatient surgery, the aspect of training and further education of specialist staff must be taken into account, as well as cross-sectoral quality assurance.
Based on a review of the international literature, this article presents 13 recommendations for adequate structures when providing outpatient services which should serve as a prerequisite for the greatest possible guarantee of patient safety.
Keywords
outpatient surgery - patient safety - networks - structures - specialist training - reimbursementPublication History
Article published online:
01 October 2024
© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References/Literatur
- 1 Statista. Anzahl von Krankenhausbetten in OECD-Ländern in den Jahren 2019 bis 2021. Accessed February 20, 2024 at: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/77168/umfrage/anzahl-von-krankenhausbetten-in-oecd-laendern
- 2 Hans Böckler Stiftung. Böckler Impuls. Arbeitswelt: Gute Arbeit gegen Pflegenotstand. Ausgabe 1/2018. Accessed February 20, 2024 at: https://de.statista.com/infografik/16676/patientenzahl-pro-pflegekraft-im-internationalen-vergleich/
- 3 Albrecht M, Mansky T, Sander M. et al. Gutachten nach §115 b Abs. 1a SGBG. IGES Institut. Berlin, März 2022. Accessed March 21, 2024 at: https://www.iges.com/sites/igesgroup/iges.de/myzms/content/e6/e1621/e10211/e27603/e27841/e27842/e27844/attr_objs27932/IGES_AOP_Gutachten_032022_ger.pdf
- 4 Struckmann V, Winkelmann J, Busse R. Versorgungsprozesse und das Zusammenspiel der Sektoren im internationalen Vergleich. In: Klauber J, Wasem J, Beivers A, Mostert C. Krankenhaus-Report 2021. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2021
- 5 Bailey CR, Ahuja M, Bartholomew K. et al. Guidelines for day-case surgery 2019: Guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists and the British Association of Day Surgery. Anaesthesia 2019; 74: 778-792
- 6 Coley KC Williams BA, DaPos SV. et al. Retrospective evaluation of unanticipated admissions and readmissions after same day surgery and associated costs. J Clin Anesth 2002; 14: 349-353
- 7 Mull HJ, Rosen AK, Charns MP. et al. Identifying Risks and Opportunities in Outpatient Surgical Patient Safety: A Qualitative Analysis of Veterans Health Administration Staff Perceptions. J Patient Saf 2021; 17: e177-e185
- 8 Emery SL, Jeannot E, Dallenbach P. et al. Minimally invasive outpatient hysterectomy for a benign indication: A systematic review. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2024; 53: 102804
- 9 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. Positionspapier zur Ambulantisierung der operativen Medizin. 09.12.2022 Accessed March 21, 2024 at: https://www.dggg.de/stellungnahmen/positionspapier-zur-ambulantisierung-der-operativen-medizin
- 10 Blohmer J, Hasenburg A, Scharl A. Positionspapier zur Ambulantisierung der operativen Medizin. Frauenarzt 2023; 64: 52-53
- 11 Korsholm M, Mogensen O, Jeppesen MM. et al. Systematic review of same-day discharge after minimally invasive hysterectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2017; 136: 128-137
- 12 Ambulatory Surgery. Volume 26.2. Ambul Surg Skues M. 2020; 26: 23-44
- 13 Chapron C, Fauconnier A, Goffinet F. et al. Laparoscopic surgery is not inherently dangerous for patients presenting with benign gynaecologic pathology. Results of a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 1334-1342
- 14 Medeiros LR, Stein AT, Fachel J. et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for benign ovarian tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008; 18: 387-399
- 15 Aarts JWM, Nieboer TE, Johnson N. et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (08) CD003677
- 16 Stone R, Carey E, Fader AN. et al. Enhanced Recovery and Surgical Optimization Protocol for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: An AAGL White Paper. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021; 28: 179-203