Certifications are an increasingly used tool of quality management in the health care system. The primary goal is to improve the quality of treatment due to implemented measures based on a defined catalog of criteria and standardization of the treatment processes. However, the extent to which this affects medical and health-economic indicators is unknown. Therefore, the study aims to examine the possible effects of the certification as a Reference Center for Hernia Surgery on the treatment quality and reimbursement dimensions. The observation and recording periods were defined as 3 years before (2013-2015) and 3 years after certification as a "Reference Center for Hernia Surgery" (2016-2018). Possible changes due to the certification were examined based on multidimensional data collection and analysis. In addition, the aspects of structure, process and result quality, and the reimbursement situation were reported. One thousand three hundred and nineteen cases before and one thousand four hundred and three cases after certification were included. After the certification, the patients were older (58.1 ± 16.1 vs. 64.0 ± 16.1 years, p < 0.01), had a higher CMI (1.01 vs. 1.06), and a higher ASA score (< III 86.9 vs. 85.5%, p < 0.01). The interventions became more complex (e.g., recurrent incisional hernias 0.5% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.01). The mean length of hospital stay was significantly reduced for incisional hernias (8.8 ± 5.8 vs. 6.7 ± 4.1 days, p < 0.001). The reoperation rate for incisional hernias also decreased significantly from 8.24 to 3.66% (p = 0.04). The postoperative complication rate for inguinal hernias was significantly reduced (3.1 vs. 1.1%, p = 0.002). The reimbursement of the hernia center increased by 27.6%. There were positive changes in process and outcome quality and reimbursement after the certification, which supports the effectivity of certifications in hernia surgery.

Increasing costs of the healthcare system might decrease the spectrum of insurance financed medical treatment in the future. Therefore we evaluated whether patients are prepared to pay partial costs of their own, especially for minimally invasive surgery. METHODICS: Between 1st July 2007 and 1st July 2008 patients were asked in a prospective trial preoperatively and postoperatively whether they would be prepared to pay an additional invoice of 200 EUR for a minimally invasive operation. Payment was reasoned by the hypothesis that insurance companies will reduce the DRG payment while costs are rising.

A total of 750 patients, men:women=279 (37.2%):471 (62.8%) undergoing elective minimally invasive operations were included in the trial. For the majority of patients (m=266:13; w=448:23) it was very important to be operated on in a center for minimally invasive surgery. Preoperatively and postoperatively the majority of patients voted for individual payment of 200 EUR to make minimally invasive surgery possible (84.4 versus 84.1%, respectively, p=0.79). Although 80.4% (411/511) of patients with national health insurance voted for payment, voting of patients with private insurance was significantly increased to 92.9% (222/239) (p<0.001). Voting for individual payment increased with a rising level of education (p=0.017), job position and income (p<0.001). Furthermore, it was significantly increased in married compared to single patients (86.5% versus 78.4%, respectively, p=0.038).

Before the operations 84.4% of patients voted for additional individual payment for minimally invasive operations but this was dependent on the socio-economic status.

Inguinal hernia (IH) surgery has changed fundamentally during the last 25 years due to tension-free repair, minimally-invasive approaches and growing influence of economy in medical decision making. Aim of the study was the documentation and analysis of changes in IH surgery during the last 15 years in our patient cohort.

Patients undergoing elective or emergency inguinal/femoral hernia repair from January 1995 to December 2009 were included in the study. Analysis of patient data was carried out by prospective online recording.

A total of 1,908 patients with 2,124 IHs were treated in the study period and the number of IH repairs decreased continuously. The number of recurrent hernias peaked in 2005-2009 with 16.4%. The average preoperative hospital stay decreased from 2.4 to 0.4 days and the postoperative hospital stay from 7.0 to 3.3 days. The percentage of suture repairs declined from 54.9% in 1995 to 4.1% in 2009 and the percentage of open tension-free repairs rose to 52.9% in 1998. In the following years the majority of repairs were performed by minimally invasive procedures but in 2009 the percentage of conventional hernia repairs exceeded the rate of minimally invasive repairs.

The main reason for these changes is the implementation of diagnosis-related groups which hampers inpatient repair of "simple" inguinal hernias, favors short hospital stay and does not adequately reimburse minimally invasive repairs.

An inadequate closure of the appendix stump leads to intra-abdominal surgical site infection. The effectiveness of various appendiceal stump closure methods, for instance, staplers or endoloops, was evaluated. Many analyses show that the use of a stapler for transection and closure of the appendiceal stump lowers the risk of this infection but a statistically significant risk of postoperative intra-abdominal abscess or wound infection was not considered in any randomized study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the complications after using endoloops in a high-volume center.

The data of 1,790 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between January 1998 and December 2006 and a single center was prospectively acquired. The standard procedure used was an appendiceal stump closure using endoloops and a selective use of staplers. The outcome criteria for inclusion in the study were intra-abdominal abscess formations, other specific intraoperative and postoperative complications, and the different costs of the operation.

Laparoscopic appendectomy was performed in 1,790 (80.8%) patients and open appendectomy in 425 (19.2%) patients. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 74 (4.13%) patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy with stump closure using endoloops was performed in 1,670 (97.3%) patients and stump closure using a stapler in 46 (2.7%) patients. Among 851 patients with acute appendicitis, 284 patients with perforated appendicitis, and 535 patients with other or no pathology, the rate of intra-abdominal abscess after using an endoloop or a stapler was not significantly different (1.5 vs. 0%, p = 0.587; 3.5 vs. 4.2%, p = 0.870; 0.7% vs. 0, p = 0.881, respectively). There were no significant differences between the endoloop group and the stapler group with respect to the other specific intraoperative and postoperative complications.

This study shows the safety of the endoloop for clinical daily routine. A selective procedure for stump closure has been established. Appendiceal stump closure using an endoloop is an easy, safe, and cost-effective procedure.