OP44 Robot-Assisted Surgery: Joint HTA To Inform Australian Policy And Funding. (2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fennessy, Paul; Clements, Vanessa; Hibbitt, Olivia
• Is Part Of: International journal of technology assessment in health care. Volume 35(2019)Supplement 1
• Page Start: 10
• Page End: 10
• Publication Date: 2019
• Subjects: Medical technology -- Periodicals; Technology assessment -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1017/S0266462319001107
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0266-4623

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Robot-Assisted Surgery (RAS) has been available in Australia since 2003. There are 50 da Vinci RAS systems in Australia (18 in NSW and 12 in Victoria) with most in the private hospital sector. In Australia the capital cost of a da Vinci RAS system is up to AUD 4 million (USD 2.8 million), which excludes annual maintenance fees of AUD 250, 000 (USD 175, 000) and consumable costs of AUD 3, 500 (USD 2, 450) for each procedure. Methods: The NSW Ministry of Health and Victorian Department of Health and Human Services commissioned a health technology assessment (HTA) to explore the benefits, risks and economic implications of surgical robotics, which involved a review of the peer reviewed literature, a cost benefit analysis of public sector patients who received RAS and broad stakeholder consultation to document current perspectives on RAS applications. Results: RAS is as safe and effective as other surgical modalities when performed by sufficiently skilled surgeons, although evidence generally comes from small studies with limited follow-up time and few studies report long term mortality, morbidity or patient-reported outcomes. Comparative benefits of RAS are uncertain as most studies conclude little or no difference in procedure related or functional outcomes. While RAS reduces length of stay, which offers patient and health system benefits, this is insufficient to fully offset high capital and consumable costs currently charged to Australian providers. Government and clinical stakeholders identified that establishing an RAS service requires consideration of important factors, including: i) Governance is critical; ii) Higher case volumes may improve financial viability; and iii) a need for state-wide/national standards for surgeon training and credentialing. Conclusions: RAS is as safe and effective as other modalities when performed by skilled surgeons. However, uncertainty remains around long-term outcomes and clinical and cost effectiveness. An accredited training program, monitoring and evaluation will be critical to ensure outcomes data inform ongoing evidence assessment and government policy and investment.