Search

Postacute care costs are the primary determinant of episode spending around hospitalization. Yet there is little evidence that greater spending on postacute care improves readmission rates or functional recovery. Recent Medicare payment reform evaluations have suggested that postacute care spending is responsive to episode-based incentives. However, it remains unknown whether Medicare payment policies are responsible for excess postacute care spending, compared with that of commercial payers. In a population-based, statewide collaborative of Michigan hospitals, we used regression discontinuity design among propensity-weighted, age-adjusted cohorts to compare postacute care spending between patients with commercial insurance and those with Medicare around age sixty-five. Spending was 68-230 percent greater among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries than among similar commercially insured people across varied medical and surgical conditions. Despite greater spending, there were no differences in readmission rates. These findings suggest that postacute care utilization is highly sensitive to payer influence, and there may be an opportunity for additional savings in Medicare without sacrificing quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate hospital performance and behaviors in the first 2 years of a statewide commercial insurance episode-based incentive pay-for-performance (P4P) program. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of price- and risk-standardized episode-of-care spending from the Michigan Value Collaborative claims data registry. METHODS: Changes in hospital-level episode spending between baseline and performance years were estimated during the program years (PYs) 2018 and 2019. The distribution and hospital characteristics associated with P4P points earned were described for both PYs. A difference-indifferences (DID) analysis compared changes in patient-level episode spending associated with program implementation. RESULTS: Hospital-level episode spending for all conditions declined significantly from the baseline year to the performance year in PY 2018 (-$671; 95% CI, -$1113 to -$230) but was not significantly different for PY 2019 ($177; 95% CI, -$412 to $767). Hospitals earned a mean (SD) total of 6.3 (3.1) of 10 points in PY 2018 and 4.5 (2.9) of 10 points in PY 2019, with few significant differences in P4P points across hospital characteristics. The highest-scoring hospitals were more likely to have changes in case mix index and decreases in spending across the entire episode of care compared with the lowest-scoring hospitals. DID analysis revealed no significant changes in patient-level episode spending associated with program implementation. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence for overall reductions in spending associated with the program, but the performance of the hospitals that achieved greatest savings and incentives provides insights into the ongoing design of hospital P4P metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The use of post-acute care (PAC) after cardiac surgery, such as rehabilitation, skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), and home health care, is common and expensive. Understanding variation in PAC use and spending will facilitate value-improvement in cardiac surgery. Hypothesis: Spending associated with PAC use after cardiac surgery will vary across hospitals, but will be highly correlated across procedures and payers within hospitals. Methods: We identified 6,033 CABG and 7,000 valve episodes using diagnosis-related group codes in Medicare and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) preferred provider organization claims at 33 Michigan hospitals. We estimated hospital price and risk-adjusted 90-day spending on PAC and its subtypes, grouped hospitals into mean spending quartiles, and compared PAC spending between the lowest and highest quartiles. We also estimated the volume-weighted correlation in PAC spending across procedures (CABG vs. valve) and payers (Medicare vs. BCBSM). Results: Among CABG and valve episodes, the rate of PAC use was 89% and 81%, and mean spending was $4,372 and $5,482, respectively. We found a 3 to 4-fold variation in PAC spending for CABG ($2,792 to $12,062) and valve ($3,153 to $11,200) episodes across hospitals. Spending on PAC was twice as high in the highest spending quartile hospitals for both CABG (+99%) and valve (+97%) surgery episodes, which was driven by differential use in inpatient rehabilitation and SNF use (Figure). Within hospitals, spending on PAC was moderately correlated across procedures (r=0.36, p=0.039) and payers (r=0.39, p=0.023). Conclusions: We found wide hospital variation in PAC spending after cardiac surgery, but moderate correlation in spending within hospitals. Identifying patient (e.g., comorbidities) and provider factors (e.g., referral patterns) that contribute to variation in PAC use is essential for optimizing care and improving value. Figure. Overall and subtype 90-day post-acute care (PAC) spending for CABG and valve surgery episodes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To derive and validate a polygenic risk score (PRS) to predict the occurrence and severity of diverticulitis and to understand the potential for incorporation of a PRS in current decision-making., Background: PRS quantifies genetic variation into a continuous measure of risk. There is a need for improved risk stratification to guide surgical decision-making that could be fulfilled by PRS. It is unknown how surgeons might integrate PRS in decision-making., Methods: We derived a PRS with 44 single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with diverticular disease in the UK Biobank and validated this score in the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI). We performed a discrete choice experiment of practicing colorectal surgeons. Surgeons rated the influence of clinical factors and a hypothetical polygenic risk prediction tool., Results: Among 2812 MGI participants with diverticular disease, 1964 were asymptomatic, 574 had mild disease, and 274 had severe disease. PRS was associated with occurrence and severity. Patients in the highest PRS decile were more likely to have diverticulitis [odds ratio (OR)=1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.42-2.38)] and more likely to have severe diverticulitis (OR=1.61; 95% CI, 1.04-2.51) than the bottom 50%. Among 213 surveyed surgeons, extreme disease-specific factors had the largest utility (3 episodes in the last year, +74.4; percutaneous drain, + 69.4). Factors with strongest influence against surgery included 1 lifetime episode (-63.3), outpatient management (-54.9), and patient preference (-39.6). PRS was predicted to have high utility (+71)., Conclusions: A PRS derived from a large national biobank was externally validated, and found to be associated with the incidence and severity of diverticulitis. Surgeons have clear guidance at clinical extremes, but demonstrate equipoise in intermediate scenarios. Surgeons are receptive to PRS, which may be most useful in marginal clinical situations. Given the current lack of accurate prognostication in recurrent diverticulitis, PRS may provide a novel approach for improving patient counseling and decision-making., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous work has demonstrated a correlation between video ratings of surgical skill and clinical outcomes. Some have proposed the use of video review for technical skill assessment, credentialing, and quality improvement., Objective: Before its adoption as a quality measure for colorectal surgeons, we must first determine whether video-based skill assessments can predict patient outcomes among specialty surgeons., Design: Twenty-one surgeons submitted one representative video of a minimally invasive colectomy. Each video was edited to highlight key steps and then rated by 10 peer surgeons using a validated American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons assessment tool. Linking surgeons' ratings to a validated surgical outcomes registry, we assessed the relationship between skill and risk-adjusted complication rates., Settings: The study was conducted with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide collaborative including 70 community, academic, and tertiary hospitals., Patients: Patients included those who underwent minimally invasive colorectal resection performed by the participating surgeons., Main Outcome Measures: Main outcome measures included 30-day risk-adjusted postoperative complications., Results: The average technical skill rating for each surgeon ranged from 2.6 to 4.6. Risk-adjusted complication rate per surgeon ranged from 9.9% to 33.1%. Patients of surgeons in the bottom quartile of overall skill ratings were older and more likely to have hypertension or to smoke; patients of surgeons in the top quartile were more likely to be immunosuppressed or have an ASA score of 3 or higher. After patient- and surgery-specific risk adjustment, there was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between the bottom and top quartile surgeons (17.5% vs 16.8%, respectively, p = 0.41)., Limitations: Limitations included retrospective cohort design with short-term follow-up of sampled cases. Videos were edited to highlight key steps, and reviewers did not undergo training to establish norms., Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that video-based peer rating of minimally invasive colectomy was not correlated with postoperative complications among specialty surgeons. As such, the adoption of video review for use in credentialing should be approached with caution. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802.CORRELACIÓN ENTRE LA HABILIDAD QUIRÚRGICA COLORRECTAL Y LOS RESULTADOS OBTENIDOS EN EL PACIENTE: RELATO PRECAUTORIOANTECEDENTES:Trabajos anteriores han demostrado una correlación entre la video-calificación de la habilidad quirúrgica y los resultados clínicos. Algunos autores han propuesto el uso de la revisión de videos para la evaluación de la habilidad técnica, la acreditación y la mejoría en la calidad quirúrgica.OBJETIVO:Antes de su adopción como medida de calidad entre los cirujanos colorrectales, primero debemos determinar si las evaluaciones de habilidades basadas en video pueden predecir los resultados clínicos de los pacientes entre cirujanos especializados.DISEÑO:Veintiún cirujanos enviaron un video representativo de una colectomía mínimamente invasiva. Cada video fue editado para resaltar los pasos clave y luego fué calificado por 10 cirujanos revisores utilizando una herramienta de evaluación validada por la ASCRS. Al vincular las calificaciones de los cirujanos al registro de resultados quirúrgicos aprobado, evaluamos la relación entre la habilidad y las tasas de complicaciones ajustadas al riesgo.AJUSTE:Colaboración en todo el estado incluyendo 70 hospitales comunitarios, académicos y terciarios, el Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos sometidos a resección colorrectal mínimamente invasiva realizada por los cirujanos participantes.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:Complicaciones posoperatorias ajustadas al riesgo a los 30 días.RESULTADOS:La calificación de la habilidad técnica promedio de cada cirujano osciló entre 2.6 y 4.6. La tasa de complicaciones ajustada al riesgo por cirujano osciló entre el 9,9% y el 33,1%. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil inferior de las calificaciones generales de habilidades eran fumadores y añosos, y tambiés más propensos a la hipertensión arterial. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil superior tenían más probabilidades de ser inmunosuprimidos o tener una puntuación ASA> = 3. Después del ajuste de riesgo específico de la cirugía y el paciente, no hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las tasas de complicaciones entre los cirujanos del cuartil inferior y superior (17,5% frente a 16,8%, respectivamente, p = 0,41).LIMITACIONES:Diseño de cohortes retrospectivo con seguimiento a corto plazo de los casos muestreados. Los videos se editaron para resaltar los pasos clave y los revisores no recibieron capacitación para establecer normas.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio demuestra que la evaluación realizada por los revisores basada en el video de la colectomía mínimamente invasiva no se correlacionó con las complicaciones post-operatorias entre los cirujanos especialistas. Por tanto, la adopción de la revisión del video quirúrgico para su uso en la acreditación profesional, debe abordarse con mucha precaución. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo)., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.)

Objective: To evaluate real-world effects of enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) dissemination on clinical and economic outcomes after colectomy., Summary Background Data: Hospitals aiming to accelerate discharge and reduce spending after surgery are increasingly adopting perioperative ERPs. Despite their efficacy in specialty institutions, most studies have lacked adequate control groups and diverse hospital settings and have considered only in-hospital costs. There remain concerns that accelerated discharge might incur unintended consequences., Methods: Retrospective, population-based cohort including patients in 72 hospitals in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative clinical registry (N = 13,611) and/or Michigan Value Collaborative claims registry (N = 14,800) who underwent elective colectomy, 2012 to 2018. Marginal effects of ERP on clinical outcomes and risk-adjusted, price-standardized 90-day episode payments were evaluated using mixed-effects models to account for secular trends and hospital performance unrelated to ERP., Results: In 24 ERP hospitals, patients Post-ERP had significantly shorter length of stay than those Pre-ERP (5.1 vs 6.5 days, P < 0.001), lower incidence of complications (14.6% vs 16.9%, P < 0.001) and readmissions (10.4% vs 11.3%, P = 0.02), and lower episode payments ($28,550 vs $31,192, P < 0.001) and postacute care ($3,384 vs $3,909, P < 0.001). In mixed-effects adjusted analyses, these effects were significantly attenuated-ERP was associated with a marginal length of stay reduction of 0.4 days (95% confidence interval 0.2-0.6 days, P = 0.001), and no significant difference in complications, readmissions, or overall spending., Conclusions: ERPs are associated with small reduction in postoperative length of hospitalization after colectomy, without unwanted increases in readmission or postacute care spending. The real-world effects across a variety of hospitals may be smaller than observed in early-adopting specialty centers., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Multidisciplinary cancer clinics deliver streamlined care and facilitate collaboration between specialties. We described patient volume and specialty service utilization, including surgery, of a multidisciplinary colorectal cancer clinic established at a tertiary care academic institution., Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of adult patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma from 2012 to 2017. We performed a descriptive analysis of patient volume, percentage of rectal cancer patients, and the number of patients who saw and received surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation each year., Results: Over 5 years, 1711 patients were served at the multidisciplinary clinic. Patient volume increased 37%, from n = 228 (annualized) to n = 312. The percentage of rectal cancer patients increased from 29% in 2013 to 42% in 2017. The highest rate of utilization was for surgery; 792 (46%) patients had surgery at the multidisciplinary clinic institution, and 510 (30%) received chemotherapy there. Out of 635 rectal cancer patients, 114 (18%) received radiation there., Conclusions: Over the five-year experience of a colorectal cancer-focused multidisciplinary clinic, overall patient volume increased by 37%. Over the study period, 63% of patients seen at the multidisciplinary clinic ultimately received at least one treatment modality at the clinic institution. Overall, the clinic's establishment resulted in the increased referral of complex patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Extended care facility use is a primary driver of variation in hospitalization-associated health care payments and is increasingly a focus for savings under episode-based payment. However, concerns remain that extended care facility limits could incur rising readmissions, emergency department use, or other costs. We analyzed the effects of a statewide value improvement initiative to decrease extended care facility use after lower extremity arthroplasty on extended care facility use, readmission, emergency department use, and payments., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using complete claims from the Michigan Value Collaborative for patients undergoing lower extremity joint replacement. We compared the change in extended care facility use before (2012-2013) and after (2016-2017) the aforementioned statewide initiative with 90-day postacute care, readmission, and emergency department rates and payments using t tests., Results: Of the patients included, 68,537 underwent total knee arthroplasty; 27,131 underwent total hip arthroplasty. Statewide, extended care facility use and postacute care payments decreased (extended care facility: 27.5% before vs 18.1% after, payments: $4,999 vs $3,832, P < .0001) without increased readmission rates (8.0% vs 7.6%, P = .10) or payments ($1,087 vs $1,026, P = .14). Emergency department use increased (7.8% vs 8.9%, P < .0001). Per hospital, there was no association between extended care facility use change and readmission rate change (r = 0.05). Hospital change in extended care facility use ranged from +2.3% (no extended care facility decrease group) to -16.6% (large extended care facility decrease group) and was associated with lower total episode payments without differences in change in readmission rate/payments or emergency department use., Conclusion: Despite decreased use of extended care facilities, there was no compensatory increase in readmission rate or payments. Reducing excess use of extended care facilities after joint replacement may be an important opportunity for savings in episode-based reimbursement., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prevention of venous thromboembolism after colorectal surgery remains challenging. National guidelines endorse thromboembolism prophylaxis for 4 weeks after colorectal cancer resection. Expert consensus favors extended prophylaxis after IBD surgery. The actual frequency of prescription after resection remains unknown., Objective: This study aimed to assess prescription of extended, postdischarge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after resection in Michigan., Design: This is a retrospective review of elective colorectal resections within a statewide collaborative receiving postdischarge, extended-duration prophylaxis., Setting: This study was conducted between October 2015 and February 2018 at an academic center., Patients: A total of 5722 patients (2171 with colorectal cancer, 266 with IBD, and 3285 with other)., Main Outcome Measures: We compared the prescription of extended, postdischarge prophylaxis over time, between hospitals and by indication., Results: Of 5722 patients, 373 (6.5%) received extended-duration prophylaxis after discharge. Use was similar between patients undergoing surgery for cancer (282/2171, 13.0%) or IBD (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), but was significantly more common for both patients undergoing surgery for cancer or IBD in comparison with patients with other indications (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). Use increased significantly among patients with cancer (6.8%-16.8%, p < 0.001) and patients with IBD (0%-15.1%, p < 0.05) over the study period. For patients with other diagnoses, use was rare and did not vary significantly (1.5%-2.3%, p = 0.49). Academic centers and large hospitals (>300 beds) were significantly more likely to prescribe extended-duration prophylaxis for all conditions (both p < 0.001), with the majority of prophylaxis concentrated at only a few hospitals., Limitations: This study was limited by the lack of assessment of actual adherence, small number of observed venous thromboembolism events, small sample of patients with IBD, and restriction to the state of Michigan., Conclusions: The use of extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after discharge is increasing, but remains uncommon in most hospitals. Efforts to improve adherence may require quality implementation initiatives or targeted payment incentives. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. ANÁLISIS POBLACIONAL DE LA ADHERENCIA A LA PROFILAXIS ANTI-TROMBÓTICA EXTENDIDA (TEV) EN PACIENTES DE ALTA LUEGO DE UNA RESECCIÓN COLORECTAL.: La prevención del tromboembolismo venoso después de cirugía colorrectal sigue siendo un desafío. Las guías nacionales han aprobado la profilaxia del tromboembolismo durante cuatro semanas luego de una resección de cáncer colorrectal. El consenso de expertos favorece la profilaxia extendida solamente después de la cirugía por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. La frecuencia real de prescripción después de la resección colorrectal sigue siendo desconocida.Evaluar la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada de tromboembolismo venoso después del alta luego de una resección colorrectal en Michigan.Revisión retrospectiva de las resecciones colorrectales electivas seguidas de una profilaxia de larga duración con el apoyo de todo el estado (MI).Este estudio se realizó entre octubre de 2015 y febrero de 2018 en un solo centro académico.Un universo de 5722 pacientes operados (2171 por cáncer colorrectal, 266 por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, 3285 por otros diagnósticos).Se comparó la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada después del alta según la duración, los hospitales y la indicación.De 5722 pacientes, 373 (6.5%) recibieron profilaxia de duración prolongada después del alta. El uso fue similar entre pacientes sometidos a cirugía por cáncer (282/2171, 13.0%) o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), pero fue significativamente más común para ambos en comparación con pacientes con otras indicaciones (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). El uso aumentó significativamente entre pacientes con cáncer (6.8% a 16.8% (p < 0.001)) y en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (0% a 15.1%, p < 0.05) durante el período de estudio. Para pacientes con otros diagnósticos, su utilización fue rara y no varió significativamente (1.5% a 2.3%, p = 0.49). Los centros académicos y los grandes hospitales (>300 camas) tenían mayor probabilidad de prescribir la profilaxia de duración extendida en todas las afecciones (ambas p < 0.001), pero la mayoría de las profilaxis se concentraron el algunos pocos grandes hospitales.Este estudio estuvo limitado por la falta de evaluación de actuales adherentes, por el pequeño número de eventos tromboembólicos venosos observados, por la pequeña muestra de pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y debido a ciertas restricciones en el estado de Michigan.El uso de profilaxia para el tromboembolismo venoso de duración prolongada después del alta está en aumento, pero su uso sigue siendo poco frecuente en la mayoría de los hospitales. Los esfuerzos para mejorar la adherencia al tratamiento pueden requerir iniciativas de mejoría en la calidad o incentivos específicos de reembolso. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Background: Both enhanced recovery and anesthesia literature recommend multimodal perioperative analgesia to hasten recovery, prevent adverse events, and reduce opioid use after surgery. However, adherence to, and outcomes of, these recommendations are unknown. We sought to characterize use of multimodal analgesia and its association with length of stay after colectomy., Materials and Methods: Within a statewide, 72-hospital collaborative quality initiative, we evaluated postoperative analgesia regimens among adult patients undergoing elective colectomy between 2012 and 2015. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with the use of multimodal analgesia and performed multivariable linear regression to evaluate its association with postoperative length of stay (LOS)., Results: Among 7265 patients who underwent elective colectomy in the study period, 4660 (64.1%) received multimodal analgesia, 2405 (33.1%) received opioids alone, and 200 (2.8%) received one nonopioid pain medication alone. Multimodal analgesia was independently associated with shorter adjusted postoperative LOS, compared with opioids alone (5.60 d [95% CI 5.38-5.81] versus 5.96 d [5.68-6.24], P = 0.016)., Conclusions: Multimodal analgesia is associated with shorter LOS, yet one-third of patients statewide received opioids alone after colectomy. As surgeons increasingly focus on our role in the opioid crisis, particularly in postdischarge opioid prescribing, we must also focus on inpatient postoperative pain management to limit opioid exposure. At the hospital level, this may have the added benefit of decreasing LOS and hastening recovery., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is increased focus on the value of surgical care. Postoperative complications decrease value, but it is unknown whether high-value hospitals spend less than low-value hospitals in cases without complications. Previous studies have not evaluated both expenditures and validated outcomes in the same patients, limiting the understanding of interactions between clinical performance, efficient utilization of services, and costliness of surgical episodes., Objective: This study aimed to identify payment differences between low- and high-value hospitals in colectomy cases without adverse outcomes using a linked data set of multipayer claims and validated clinical outcomes., Design: This is a retrospective observational cohort study. We assigned each hospital a value score (ratio of cases without adverse outcome to mean episode payment). We stratified hospitals into tertiles by value and used analysis of variance tests to compare payments between low- and high-value hospitals, first for all cases, and then cases without adverse outcome., Setting: January 2012 to December 2016, this investigation used clinical registry data from 56 hospitals participating in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, linked with 30-day episode payments from the Michigan Value Collaborative., Patients: A total of 2947 patients undergoing elective colectomy were selected., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measured was risk-adjusted, price-standardized 30-day episode payments., Results: The mean adjusted complication rate was 31% (±10.7%) at low-value hospitals and 14% (±4.6%) at high-value hospitals (p < 0.001). Low-value hospitals were paid $3807 (17%) more than high-value hospitals ($22,271 vs $18,464, p < 0.001). Among cases without adverse outcome, payments were still $2257 (11%) higher in low-value hospitals ($19,424 vs $17,167, p = 0.04)., Limitations: This study focused on outcomes and did not consider processes of care as drivers of value., Conclusions: In elective colectomy, high-value hospitals achieve lower episode payments than low-value hospitals for cases without adverse outcome, indicating mechanisms for increasing value beyond reducing complications. Worthwhile targets to optimize value in elective colectomy may include enhanced recovery protocols or other interventions that increase efficiency in all phases of care. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B56. LOGRANDO LA COLECTOMÍA DE ALTO VALOR: PREVINIENDO COMPLICACIONES O MEJORANDO LA EFICIENCIA: Hay un mayor enfoque en el valor de la atención quirúrgica. Las complicaciones postoperatorias disminuyen el valor, pero se desconoce si en los casos sin complicaciones, los hospitales de alto valor gastan menos que los hospitales de bajo valor. Estudios anteriores no han evaluado ambos gastos y validado resultados en los mismos pacientes, limitando la comprensión de las interacciones entre el rendimiento clínico, utilización eficiente de los servicios y costos de los episodios quirúrgicos.Identificar las diferencias de pago entre los hospitales de alto y bajo valor, en casos de colectomía sin resultados adversos, utilizando un conjunto de datos vinculados de reclamos de pago múltiple y resultados clínicos validados.Estudio de cohorte observacional retrospectivo. Asignamos a cada hospital una puntuación de valor (proporción de casos sin resultado adverso al pago medio del episodio). Estratificamos los hospitales por valor en terciles y utilizamos el análisis de pruebas de varianza para comparar los pagos entre hospitales de bajo y alto valor, primero para todos los casos y luego casos sin resultados adversos.De enero del 2012 a diciembre del 2016, utilizando datos de registro clínico de 56 hospitales que participan en el Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, vinculado con pagos de episodios de 30 días, del Michigan Value Collaborative.Un total de 2947 pacientes con colectomía electiva.Pagos por episodio de 30 días, ajustados al riesgo y estandarizados por precio.La tasa media de complicación ajustada fue de 31% (±10.7%) en hospitales de bajo valor y 14% (±4.6%) en hospitales de alto valor (p < 0.001). A los hospitales de bajo valor se les pagó $3807 (17%) más que a los hospitales de alto valor ($22,271 frente a $18,464, p < 0.001). Entre los casos sin resultados adversos, los pagos fueron de $2257 (11%) más altos en hospitales de bajo valor ($19,424 vs $17,167, p = 0.04).Este estudio se centró en los resultados y no se consideraron a los procesos de atención, como impulsores de valor.En la colectomía electiva, los hospitales de alto valor logran pagos de episodios más bajos, que en los hospitales de bajo valor con casos sin resultados adversos, indicando mecanismos para aumentar el valor, más allá que la reducción de complicaciones. Objetivos valiosos para optimizar el valor de la colectomía electiva, pueden incluir mejoras en los protocolos de recuperación, así como otras intervenciones que aumenten la eficiencia en todas las fases de la atención. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B56.

Background: Health care providers, hospitals, and pay-for-performance programs are focused on strategies identifying patients at highest risk for re-admission after colorectal surgery. The study objective was to determine characteristics most associated with re-admission after elective colorectal surgery using a conceptual framework approach., Methods: This is an observational study of Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative clinical registry data for 8962 colorectal surgery cases between July-2012 and April-2015. Separate mixed models were fit using known re-admission risk factors aligned in categories that may impact re-admissions by different mechanisms. Overall model discrimination was evaluated using Area Under the Curve estimated on a hold-out data set and examining differences in predicted versus observed re-admission across risk quintiles., Results: The overall 30-day re-admission rate was 10.5%. From Model 1 to Model 6, discrimination of re-admission was poor until Model 6 (AUC, 0.56, 0.61, 0.65, 0.63, 0.72, 0.81). Differences for observed re-admission rates comparing 'very low' versus 'very high' risk strata from Model 1 to Model 6 were 6%, 11%, 15%, 14%, 20%, and 30% respectively, and all comparisons were significant (p < 0.01). Though there were significant predictors in the first five models, most were no longer significant when additional predictors were included in subsequent models. Complications identified after discharge significantly increased the likelihood of re-admission and were the strongest predictors., Conclusion: Statistical models that include complications identified after discharge predict re-admission. Strategies to reduce re-admission after colorectal surgery should emphasize prevention of complications and more effective interventions to manage and ameliorate evolving complications identified after discharge.

Background: The Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) is a national pay-for-performance program that includes a measure of surgical site infection (SSI) after hysterectomy and colectomy. This study compares the HACRP SSI measure with other published methods., Study Design: This was a retrospective cohort study from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC). The outcome was 30-day, adjusted deep and organ space SSI ("complex SSI"). Observed-to-expected ratios of complex SSI for each hospital were calculated using HACRP, National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), and MSQC methodologies. C-statistics were compared between models. Hospital rankings were compared, and ladder plots show changes in hospitals' HACRP scores that derive from each algorithm., Results: Complex SSI occurred in 1.1% (190 of 16,672) of hysterectomies and 4.8% (n = 514 of 10,725) of colectomies. The HACRP risk-adjustment model for hysterectomy had a C-statistic of 0.55, significantly lower than NHSN (0.61, p = 0.0461) or MSQC models (0.77, p < 0.0001). For colectomy, C-statistics were 0.57, 0.66 (p < 0.0001) and 0.73 (p < 0.0001), respectively. For both operations, there were 5 high-outlier hospitals using HACRP, but fewer (4 or 3) using the other methods. Most hospitals in the bottom quartile were not statistical outliers, but would be flagged under HACRP. More than 50% of hospitals changed ranking position between models, which would result in different scores under HACRP., Conclusions: This study showed that the HACRP SSI measure unfairly places hospitals at risk for financial penalties that are not statistical outliers. Policy makers need to weigh the burden of data collection and the accuracy needed to identify hospitals for financial reward or penalty., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Conversion from minimally invasive to open colorectal surgery remains common and costly. Robotic colorectal surgery is associated with lower rates of conversion than laparoscopy, but institutions and payers remain concerned about equipment and implementation costs. Recognizing that reimbursement reform and bundled payments expand perspectives on cost to include the entire surgical episode, we evaluated the role of minimally invasive conversion in total payments., Methods: This is an observational study from a linked data registry including clinical data from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative and payment data from the Michigan Value Collaborative between July 2012 and April 2015. We evaluated colorectal resections initiated with open and minimally invasive approaches, and compared reported risk-adjusted and price-standardized 30-day episode payments and their components., Results: We identified 1061 open, 1604 laparoscopic, and 275 robotic colorectal resections. Adjusted episode payments were significantly higher for open operations than for minimally invasive procedures completed without conversion ($19,489 vs. $15,518, p < 0.001). The conversion rate was significantly higher with laparoscopic than robotic operations (15.1 vs. 7.6%, p < 0.001). Adjusted episode payments for minimally invasive operations converted to open were significantly higher than for those completed by minimally invasive approaches ($18,098 vs. $15,518, p < 0.001). Payments for operations completed robotically were greater than those completed laparoscopically ($16,949 vs. $15,250, p < 0.001), but the difference was substantially decreased when conversion to open cases was included ($16,939 vs. $15,699, p = 0.041)., Conclusion: Episode payments for open colorectal surgery exceed both laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive options. Conversion to open surgery significantly increases the payments associated with minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Because conversion rates in robotic colorectal operations are half of those in laparoscopy, the excess expenditures attributable to robotics are attenuated by consideration of the cost of conversions.

Background: Anastomotic leak is a major source of morbidity in colorectal operations and has become an area of interest in performance metrics. It is unclear whether anastomotic leak is associated primarily with surgeons' technical performance or explained better by patient characteristics and institutional factors. We sought to establish if anastomotic leak could serve as a valid quality metric in colorectal operations by evaluating provider variation after adjusting for patient factors., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of colorectal resection patients in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Clinically relevant patient and operative factors were tested for association with anastomotic leak. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to derive risk-adjusted rates of anastomotic leak., Results: Of 9,192 colorectal resections, 244 (2.7%) had a documented anastomotic leak. The incidence of anastomotic leak was 3.0% for patients with pelvic anastomoses and 2.5% for those with intra-abdominal anastomoses. Multivariable analysis showed that a greater operative duration, male sex, body mass index >30 kg/m 2 , tobacco use, chronic immunosuppressive medications, thrombocytosis (platelet count >400 × 10 9 /L), and urgent/emergency operations were independently associated with anastomotic leak (C-statistic = 0.75). After accounting for patient and procedural risk factors, 5 hospitals had a significantly greater incidence of postoperative anastomotic leak., Conclusion: This population-based study shows that risk factors for anastomotic leak include male sex, obesity, tobacco use, immunosuppression, thrombocytosis, greater operative duration, and urgent/emergency operation; models including these factors predict most of the variation in anastomotic leak rates. This study suggests that anastomotic leak can serve as a valid metric that can identify opportunities for quality improvement., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite improved survival with chemotherapy for stage III colorectal cancer (CRC), patients may suffer substantial economic hardship during treatment. Methods for quantifying financial burden in CRC patients are lacking., Objective: To derive and validate a novel patient-reported measure of personal financial burden during CRC treatment., Data Collection: Within a population-based survey of patients in the Detroit and Georgia Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results regions diagnosed with stage III CRC between 2011 and 2013, we asked 7 binary questions assessing effects of disease and treatment on personal finances., Data Analysis: We used factor analysis to compute a composite measure of financial burden. We used χ tests to evaluate relationships between individual components of financial burden and chemotherapy use with χ analyses. We used Mantel-Haenszel χ trend tests to examine relationships between the composite financial burden metric and chemotherapy use., Results: Among 956 patient surveys (66% response rate), factor analysis of 7 burden items yielded a single-factor solution. Factor loadings of 6 items were >0.4; these were included in the composite score. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α=0.79). The mean financial burden score among all respondents was 1.72 (range, 0-6). The 812 (85%) who reported chemotherapy use had significantly higher financial burden scores than those who did not (mean burden score 1.88 vs. 0.88, P<0.001)., Conclusions: Financial burden is high among CRC patients, particularly those who use adjuvant chemotherapy. We encourage use of our instrument to validate our measure in the identification of patients in need of additional financial support during treatment.