Economic Impact of COVID-19 on a Free-Standing Pediatric Ambulatory Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Operating safely throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required surgical centers to adapt and raise their level of readiness. Intuitively, additional expenses related to such adaptation may have resulted in an increase in the cost of surgical care. However, little is known about the magnitude of such an increase, and no study has evaluated the temporal variation in the costs of care throughout the pandemic. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the cost of surgical and anesthetic care in a free-standing, pediatric ambulatory care center. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of the electronic medical record (EMR) and financial data for pediatric ambulatory settings between 2019 and 2020 (April - August) from our tertiary care children's hospital. The primary outcomes were the inflation-adjusted surgical cost for elective tonsillectomy, adenoidectomy, and tympanostomy tubes (BTI) placement procedures in children less than 18 years of age. These data were obtained from financial databases and aggregated into categories including anesthesia services, operating room services, recovery room services, and supply and medical devices. Results: Costs per case to provide care were significantly higher following the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared to 2019 across all services: anesthesia ($1,268 versus $1,143; cost ratio (CR): 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08 - 1.14, P-value < 0.001), operating room ($1,221 vs. $1,255; CR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02 - 1.04, P-value < 0.001), recovery room ($659 vs. $751; CR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.10 - 1.18, P-value < 0.001), and supply ($150 vs. $271; CR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.26 - 2.6, P-value = 0.001). There was an overall increase in healthcare service costs in 2020, with significant fluctuations in the early and mid-year months. Conclusion: Our study identified specific economic impacts of COVID-19 on free-standing pediatric ambulatory centers, thereby highlighting the need for innovative practices with cost containment for sustainability of such specialized centers when dealing with future pandemics related to COVID-19 or other viral pathogens.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".