Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:19:23.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Adoption and Use of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy by Hospitals in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Elaine J. Power
Elaine J. Power
Affiliation:
Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, DC
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for upper urinary stones has been in use in the United States since 1984. It was accepted immediately by hospitals and physicians, and its diffusion has been and continues to be rapid. Government payment and planning policies do not seem to have slowed this diffusion, although they have had some effect on the ownership of lithotripters and the manner in which ESWL is provided. An unintended but foreseeable result of ESWL's popularity with hospitals, physicians, and patients is that ESWL is not only rapidly replacing traditional surgery but is being used on many patients who would not have had surgery. It is likely that many more upper urinary stones are being treated aggressively now than before ESWL was introduced.

Type
Special Section: The Organization and Use of Technology in the Hospital Part II: Case Studies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , July 1987 , pp. 397 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Alder, H. C. Lithotripters: Noninvasive devices for the treatment of kidney stones. Hospital technology series guideline report 4(9), AHA-012828. Chicago, IL: American Hospital Association, 1985.Google Scholar
2.American Urologie Association. Summary and recommendations of the ad hoc committee to study the safety and clinical effectiveness of the current technology of (1) percutaneous lithotripsy, and (2) non-invasive lithotripsy. Presented to the AUA, New Orleans, LA, 05 9, 1985.Google Scholar
3.Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: Clinical assessment, utilization and cost projection. Chicago, IL: Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 1985.Google Scholar
4.Biomedicai Business International. Lithotripter developments. 1986, IX, 210.Google Scholar
5.Dornier Medical Systems. Dornier lithotripter IDE submission. 09 30, 1982,14–20.Google Scholar
6.Goodfriend, R.Ultrasonic and electrohydraulic lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. Urology, 1984, 23, 5–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Huffman, J. L., Bagley, D. H., & Schoenberg, H. W.Transurethral removal of larger ureteral and renal pelvic calculi using ureteroscopic ultrasonic lithotripsy. Journal of Urology, 1983, 130, 31–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Iverson, K., Dornier Medical Systems, Marietta, GA, personal communication, June 1986.Google Scholar
9.Jenkins, A., University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, VA, personal communication, November 1985.Google Scholar
10.Lingeman, J. E., Saywell, R. M., Woods, J. R., et al. Cost analysis of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy relative to other surgical and nonsurgical treatment alternatives for urolithiasis. Medical Care, 1986, 24, 1151–1160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Medstone International, press release, June 12, 1985.Google Scholar
12.Showstack, J. A., Perez-Stable, E. J., & Sawitz, E.Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: Clinical application and medicare physician payment. Paper prepared for the U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, August 1, 1985.Google Scholar
13.The Gray Sheet. Candela's flash lamp excited tunable dye laser cleared for kidney stone treatment. 12 15, 1986, 12(50), 1–2.Google Scholar
14.U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Health technology case study 36: Effects of federal policies on extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. OTA-HCS-36, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1986.Google Scholar
15.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HHS News, Dec. 19, 1984.Google Scholar
16.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics. Detailed diagnoses and procedures for patients discharged from short-stay hospitals, United States, 1983. Vital and health statistics, Series 13 No. 86, DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 85–1743. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1985.Google Scholar