Cost analysis of Greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate compared to transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate gland, which results in the development of lower urinary tract symptoms that can interfere with a patient's daily activities and negatively impact their quality of life. The gold standard treatment for moderate to severe BPH has been transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), however, this procedure is associated with prolonged hospitalizations and increased complications. An alternative to TURP is Greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), which is associated with better perioperative safety. The objectives of the research were to 1) assess the cost of Greenlight PVP compared to TURP and bipolar TURP; and 2) assess the predictors of total cost. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive costing study from the hospital perspective. We evaluated perioperative costs of patients who underwent each procedure from 2013-2015 at a tertiary academic medical centre. A multiple linear regression was performed to identify predictors of total cost. The variables included in regression analysis were patient age, type of procedure, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and distance to clinic. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients received one of the three procedures over the study period. The total cost of Greenlight PVP was $3836 per patient compared to $4963 for TURP and $4978 for bipolar TURP. The linear regression showed that the Charlson Comorbidity Index and type of procedure were independent predictors of total cost. CONCLUSIONS: The procedure costs and readmission rates are lower for Greenlight PVP compared to TURP and bipolar TURP, making it a preferable option for hospitals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".