Search

Objectives: To compare the safety and resource-efficacy of the fast-track (FT) concept (extubation ≤8 hours after surgery) versus the conventional approach (non-FT, >8 hours postoperatively) in infants undergoing open-heart surgery., Methods: Infants <7 kg operated on cardiopulmonary bypass between 2014 and 2018 were analyzed. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed for group comparison (FT vs non-FT). Intensive care unit (ICU) personnel use and unit performance were evaluated. Postoperative outcome and reimbursement based on German diagnosis-related groups were compared., Results: Of 717 infants (median age: 4 months, Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery mortality score: 0.1-4), FT extubation was achieved in 182 infants (25%). After matching, 123 pairs (FT vs non-FT) were formed without significant differences in baseline characteristics. FT versus non-FT showed a significantly shorter ICU stay (in days): 1.8 (0.9-2.8) versus 4.2 (1.9-6.4), P < .01, and postoperative length of stay (in days): 7 (6-10) versus 10 (7-15.5), P < .01; significantly lower postoperative transfusion rates: 61.3% versus 77%, P < .01; and tendency toward lower early mortality: 0% versus 2.8%, P = .08. Reintubation rate did not differ between the groups (P = .7). Despite a decrease in personnel capacity (2014 vs 2018), the unit performance was maintained. The mean case-mix-index of FT versus non-FT was 8.56 ± 6.08 versus 11.77 ± 12.10 (P < .01), resulting in 27% less reimbursement in the FT group., Conclusions: FT concept can be performed safely and resource-effectively in infants undergoing open-heart surgery. Since German diagnosis-related group systems reimburse costs, not performance, there is little incentive to avoid prolonged mechanical ventilation. Greater ICU turnover rates and excellent postoperative outcomes are not rewarded adequately., (Copyright © 2020 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Readmission rates after cardiac surgery are being used as a quality indicator; they are also being collected by Medicare and are tied to reimbursement. Accurate knowledge of readmission rates may be difficult to achieve because patients may be readmitted to different hospitals. In our area, 81 hospitals share administrative claims data; 28 of these hospitals (from 5 different hospital systems) do cardiac surgery and share Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) clinical data. We used these 2 sources to compare the readmissions data for accuracy., Methods: A total of 45,539 STS records from January 2008 to December 2016 were matched with the hospital billing data records. Using the index visit as the start date, the billing records were queried for any subsequent in-patient visits for that patient. The billing records included date of readmission and hospital of readmission data and were compared with the data captured in the STS record., Results: We found 1153 (2.5%) patients who had STS records that were marked "No" or "missing," but there were billing records that showed a readmission. The reported STS readmission rate of 4796 (10.5%) underreported the readmission rate by 2.5 actual percentage points. The true rate should have been 13.0%. Actual readmission rate was 23.8% higher than reported by the clinical database. Approximately 36% of readmissions were to a hospital that was a part of a different hospital system., Conclusions: It is important to know accurate readmission rates for quality improvement processes and institutional financial planning. Matching patient records to an administrative database showed that the clinical database may fail to capture many readmissions. Combining data with an administrative database can enhance accuracy of reporting., (Copyright © 2017 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Pay-for-performance measures, part of the Affordable Care Act, aim to reduce health care costs by linking value with Medicare payments, but until now the concept of value has not been applied to specific procedures. We sought to define value in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and provide a framework to identify high-value centers., Methods: In a multiinstitutional statewide database, clinical patient-level data from 42,839 patients undergoing CABG were matched with cost data. Hierarchical models adjusting for relevant preoperative patient characteristics and comorbidities were used to estimate center-specific risk-adjusted costs and risk-adjusted postoperative length of stay. Variation in value across centers was assessed by the correlation between risk-adjusted measures of quality (mortality, morbidity/mortality) and resource use (costs and length of stay)., Results: There were no significant correlations between risk-adjusted costs and risk-adjusted mortality (r = 0.20, P = .45) or morbidity/mortality (r = 0.15, P = .57) across centers. Risk-adjusted costs and length of stay were not significantly associated (r = 0.23, P = .37) because of cost accounting differences across centers. This may explain the lack of correlation between risk-adjusted quality and risk-adjusted cost measures. When risk-adjusted length of stay and morbidity/mortality were used for the framework, there was a strong positive correlation (r = 0.67, P = .003), indicating that higher risk-adjusted quality is associated with shorter risk-adjusted length of stay., Conclusions: Risk-adjusted length of stay and risk-adjusted combined morbidity/mortality are important outcome measures for assessing value in cardiac surgery. The proposed framework can be used to define value in CABG and identify high-value centers, thereby providing information for quality improvement and pay-for-performance initiatives., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study was undertaken to examine interhospital variability in inpatient costs of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)., Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify isolated CABGs performed between 2005 and 2008 in the United States. Charges for inpatient care were supplied by the data set, and hospital charge-to-cost ratios were used to derive inpatient costs for each patient and aggregated at the hospital level. Mixed-effect linear regression models were created to evaluate variability in costs between hospitals adjusting for 34 patient, operative, complication, and hospital-related variables., Results: A total of 633 hospitals performed isolated CABG in 183,973 patients. In unadjusted analysis, there was significant baseline variability in average inpatient costs of CABG between hospitals (SD, $12,130; P < .001). This variability represented 30% of the overall unadjusted average cost of performing CABG per hospital ($40,424). After risk adjustment, significant variability in average costs between hospitals persisted (P < .001). Of the 34 additional variables included in the model, only hospital region, postoperative sepsis, in-hospital mortality, and need for ventricular assist device, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, permanent pacemaker, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator were stronger predictors of increased costs compared with the hospital effect., Conclusions: There is a wide variation in the cost of performing CABG in the United States. We determined that individual hospital centers, independent of multiple patient- and outcome-specific factors, are drivers of these differences. Comparison of hospital-specific behavior with identification of the causes of cost discrepancies represents an opportunity for standardization of care and improvement in resource use., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Mosby, Inc.)

Objective: We evaluated the combined effect of hospital and surgeon volume on operative outcomes of mitral valve surgery in the United States., Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify adult patients undergoing isolated mitral valve surgery for mitral regurgitation from 2003 to 2008. Hospitals and surgeons were separately stratified into equal-size tertiles according to annual overall mitral valve operative volumes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted, adjusting for multiple patient, hospital, and operative data, to determine the separate and combined effects of hospital and surgeon volume on operative outcomes., Results: A total of 50,152 eligible patients were identified during the study period. Although both hospital and surgeon volume correlated significantly with operative mortality in separate risk-adjusted analyses, only lower surgeon volume persisted as a significant risk factor in the combined risk-adjusted analysis. Moreover, although hospital volume only accounted for 10.7% of the surgeon volume effect on increased mortality for low-volume surgeons, surgeon volume accounted for 74.5% of the hospital volume effect on increased mortality in low-volume hospitals. Surgeon, but not hospital, volume correlated with inpatient costs. Also, significant trends were seen with repair rates, with increasing surgeon volume demonstrating a relatively stronger correlation with the odds of repair (P < .001) than hospital volume (P = .01)., Conclusions: The effect of hospital volume on operative outcomes of mitral valve surgery was largely driven by the individual surgeon volumes within that hospital. Conversely, surgeon volume affected these outcomes independently of hospital volume. Identifying the processes by which higher volume surgeons attain better outcomes in mitral valve surgery would therefore be prudent., (Copyright © 2013 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This investigation compared patients undergoing lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer by either a general surgeon or a cardiothoracic surgeon across a geographically diverse system of hospitals to see whether a significant difference in quality or cost was present., Methods: The Premiere administrative database and tumor registry data of a single health system's hospitals was used to compare adherence to national treatment guidelines, patient outcomes, and charges for patients undergoing lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer in a 5-year period. Surgeons performing lobectomy were designated as a general surgeon or cardiothoracic surgeon according to their national provider number and board certification status. Excluded from analysis were centers that performed fewer than 50 lobectomies during the study period., Results: During the study period, 2823 lobectomies were performed by 46 general surgeons and 3653 lobectomies were performed by 29 cardiothoracic surgeons in 54 hospitals in a single health care system. Significant differences were found between general and cardiothoracic surgeons with respect to adherence to national guidelines in staging and treatment, mean length of stay, significant morbidity, and operative mortality. Mean charges for lobectomy of the lung were also found to differ significantly between general and cardiothoracic surgeons., Conclusions: This review found that currently measurable indicators for quality of care were significantly superior and overall charges were significantly reduced when a lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer was performed by a cardiothoracic surgeon rather than by a general surgeon., (Copyright © 2013 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)