Cost-effectiveness of a short stay admission programme for breast cancer surgery

M. de Kok*, C.D. Dirksen, A.G.H. Kessels, G.D.E.M. van der Weijden, C.J. van de Velde, J.A. Roukema, A.V. Bell, F.W. van der Ent, M.F. von Meyenfeldt

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


Background. Short stay (admission, surgery, and discharge the same day or within 24 hours) following breast cancer surgery is part of an established care protocol but as yet not well implemented in Europe. Alongside a before-after multi-centre implementation study, an economic evaluation was performed exploring the cost-effectiveness of a short stay programme (SSP) versus care as usual (CAU). Material and methods. In the implementation study, 324 patients were included. In the economic evaluation a societal perspective was applied with a six week time horizon. Cost data were obtained from Case Record Forms and cost diaries. Effectiveness was assessed by calculating Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs), using the EuroQol-5D. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as the incremental costs per QALY. Results. Mean societal costs decreased by (sic)955,- (95% CI (sic) - 2104,- to (sic)157,-) for patients in SSP (n=127) compared with CAU (n=135). Mean healthcare costs differed (sic)883,- (95% CI (sic) - 1560,- to (sic)-870,-) in favour of SSP. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio could not be calculated due to similar effectiveness for both groups, i.e. the difference in QALYs was zero. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the probability that SSP was more cost-effective than CAU was over 90% in the base-case analysis. Discussion. A short stay programme as implemented is cost-effective compared with care as usual. In achieving good and more efficient quality of care, larger scale implementation is warranted.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)338-346
Number of pages9
JournalActa Oncologica
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2010


  • EQ-5D
  • CARE
  • LIFE

Cite this