Search

ImportanceDespite the significant contribution of surgical spending to health care costs, most surgeons are unaware of their operating room costs.ObjectiveTo examine the association between providing surgeons with individualized cost feedback and surgical supply costs in the operating room.Design, setting, and participantsThe OR Surgical Cost Reduction (OR SCORE) project was a single-health system, multihospital, multidepartmental prospective controlled study in an urban academic setting. Intervention participants were attending surgeons in orthopedic surgery, otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, and neurological surgery (n = 63). Control participants were attending surgeons in cardiothoracic surgery, general surgery, vascular surgery, pediatric surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, ophthalmology, and urology (n = 186).InterventionsFrom January 1 to December 31, 2015, each surgeon in the intervention group received standardized monthly scorecards showing the median surgical supply direct cost for each procedure type performed in the prior month compared with the surgeon's baseline (July 1, 2012, to November 30, 2014) and compared with all surgeons at the institution performing the same procedure at baseline. All surgical departments were eligible for a financial incentive if they met a 5% cost reduction goal.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was each group's median surgical supply cost per case. Secondary outcome measures included total departmental surgical supply costs, case mix index-adjusted median surgical supply costs, patient outcomes (30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and discharge status), and surgeon responses to a postintervention study-specific health care value survey.ResultsThe median surgical supply direct costs per case decreased 6.54% in the intervention group, from $1398 (interquartile range [IQR], $316-$5181) (10 637 cases) in 2014 to $1307 (IQR, $319-$5037) (11 820 cases) in 2015. In contrast, the median surgical supply direct cost increased 7.42% in the control group, from $712 (IQR, $202-$1602) (16 441 cases) in 2014 to $765 (IQR, $233-$1719) (17 227 cases) in 2015. This decrease represents a total savings of $836 147 in the intervention group during the 1-year study. After controlling for surgeon, department, patient demographics, and clinical indicators in a mixed-effects model, there was a 9.95% (95% CI, 3.55%-15.93%; P = .003) surgical supply cost decrease in the intervention group over 1 year. Patient outcomes were equivalent or improved after the intervention, and surgeons who received scorecards reported higher levels of cost awareness on the health care value survey compared with controls.Conclusions and relevanceCost feedback to surgeons, combined with a small departmental financial incentive, was associated with significantly reduced surgical supply costs, without negatively affecting patient outcomes.

IntroductionAdvances in surgical technique, implant design, and clinical care pathways have resulted in higher expectations for improved clinical outcomes after primary THA; however, despite these advances, it is unclear whether the risk of revision THA actually has decreased with time. Understanding trends in short- and mid-term risks of revision will be helpful in directing clinical, research, and policy efforts to improve THA outcomes.Question/purposesWe therefore asked (1) whether there have been changes in overall short- and mid-term risks of revision THA among patients in the Medicare population who underwent primary THA between 1998 and 2010; and (2) whether there are different demographic factors associated with short- and mid- term risks of revision THA.MethodsUsing the Medicare 5% national sample database, patients who underwent primary THA between 1998 and 2010 followed by subsequent revision through 2011 were identified by ICD-9-CM procedure codes 81.51 and 81.53/80.05/00.70-00.73, respectively. This dataset included a random sample of Medicare beneficiaries based on their social security number. Only patients with minimum 1-year followup after primary THA were included in our analysis. A total of 64,260 patients who underwent primary THA were identified from the 1998 to 2010 Medicare 5% dataset. Eighty-eight percent of the patients had 1-year followup providing a final study cohort of 56,700 patients. The risk of revision was evaluated at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years. Multivariate Cox regression was used to evaluate temporal trends in revision risk using two methods to account for time effects with periods 1998 to 2002, 2003 to 2007, and 2008 to 2010 for the index year of primary THA, and individual year of index of primary THA as independent variables. The analysis adjusted for patient age, sex, race, census region, Charlson score, and socioeconomic status.ResultsThe 7-year crude risk of revision THA declined from 7.10% in 1998 to 2002 to 6.09% in 2008 to 2010, representing a 14.4% overall reduction in adjusted risk of revision (p = 0.0058; 95% CI, 4.4%-23%). Similarly, the 5-year crude risk of revision THA declined from 5.96% in 1998 to 2002 to 5.11% in 2008 to 2010, representing a 14.2% overall reduction in adjusted risk of revision (p = 0.0069; 95% CI, 4.1%-23%). However, the adjusted risk of revision THA at 3 years was not different from 1998 to 2002 (4.70%) and 2008 to 2010 (4.03%; p = 0.1176). Similarly, the adjusted risk of revision at 1 year did not differ from 1998 to 2002 (2.83%) and 2008 to 2010 (2.42%; p = 0.3386). Patients with more comorbidities had a greater adjusted risk of revision (p < 0.001) at all times: 94% (95% CI, 58%-138%) and 56% (95% CI, 33%-84%) at 1 year and 7 years, respectively, for Charlson score of 5+ vs 0).ConclusionsAlthough the mid-term (5 and 7 years) risk of revision THA has decreased during the past 14 years among Medicare beneficiaries who underwent primary THA, the short-term risk has not. These findings suggest that greater clinical, research, and policy emphasis is needed to identify potentially avoidable causes of early failure after primary THA in patients in the Medicare population, and multistakeholder solutions are needed to optimize short-term outcomes.Level of evidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.

BackgroundRevision THA and TKA are growing and important clinical and economic challenges. Healthcare systems tend to combine revision joint replacement procedures into a single service line, and differences between revision THA and revision TKA remain incompletely characterized. These differences carry implications for guiding care and resource allocation. We therefore evaluated epidemiologic trends associated with revision THAs and TKAs.Questions/purposesWe sought to determine differences in (1) the number of patients undergoing revision TKA and THA and respective demographic trends; (2) differences in the indications for and types of revision TKA and THA; (3) differences in patient severity of illness scoring between THA and TKA; and (4) differences in resource utilization (including cost and length of stay [LOS]) between revision THA and TKA.MethodsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to evaluate 235,857 revision THAs and 301,718 revision TKAs between October 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010. Patient characteristics, procedure information, and resource utilization were compared across revision THAs and TKAs. A revision burden (ratio of number of revisions to total number of revision and primary surgeries) was calculated for hip and knee procedures. Severity of illness scoring and cost calculations were derived from the NIS. As our study was principally descriptive, statistical analyses generally were not performed; however, owing to the large sample size available to us through this NIS analysis, even small observed differences presented are likely to be highly statistically significant.ResultsRevision TKAs increased by 39% (revision burden, 9.1%-9.6%) and THAs increased by 23% (revision burden, 15.4%-14.6%). Revision THAs were performed more often in older patients compared with revision TKAs. Periprosthetic joint infection (25%) and mechanical loosening (19%) were the most common reasons for revision TKA compared with dislocation (22%) and mechanical loosening (20%) for revision THA. Full (all-component) revision was more common in revision THAs (43%) than in TKAs (37%). Patients who underwent revision THA generally were sicker (> 50% major severity of illness score) than patients who underwent revision TKA (65% moderate severity of illness score). Mean LOS was longer for revision THAs than for TKAs. Mean hospitalization costs were slightly higher for revision THA (USD 24,697 +/- USD 40,489 [SD]) than revision TKA (USD 23,130 +/- USD 36,643 [SD]). Periprosthetic joint infection and periprosthetic fracture were associated with the greatest LOS and costs for revision THAs and TKAs.ConclusionsThese data could prove important for healthcare systems to appropriately allocate resources to hip and knee procedures: the revision burden for THA is 52% greater than for TKA, but revision TKAs are increasing at a faster rate. Likewise, the treating clinician should understand that while both revision THAs and TKAs bear significant clinical and economic costs, patients undergoing revision THA tend to be older, sicker, and have greater costs of care.

BackgroundOutcomes research in THA has focused largely on long-term implant survivorship as a primary outcome and emphasized the development of new implant technologies. In contrast, strategies to improve short-term outcomes, such as the frequencies of periprosthetic joint infections and unplanned readmissions, have received less attention.Questions/purposesWe asked whether reductions in periprosthetic joint infections and early readmissions would have greater influence on the net monetary benefit (a summation of lifetime cost and quality of life) for THA compared with equivalent reductions in aseptic loosening.MethodsA Markov model was created using decision-analysis software with six health states and death to represent seven major potential outcomes of THA. We compared the effect of a 10% reduction in each of the following outcomes: (1) periprosthetic joint infection, (2) hospital readmission, and (3) aseptic loosening. Procedure costs (not charges) were derived from our hospital cost-accounting system. Probabilities were derived primarily from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, and utilities were estimated from a previous study at our institution using the time trade-off method. The primary outcome of the study is the net monetary benefit, which combines the reductions in cost and improvement in health-related quality of life in a single metric. Quality of life is expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), which are calculated by multiplying the utility of a health state (ranging from 0 to 1) by the duration of time in the health state. The cost and QALYs are reported separately as secondary outcomes. One-way and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis to account for uncertainty in model inputs.ResultsThe net monetary benefit for a 10% reduction in periprosthetic joint infections was USD 278 (95% CI, USD 239-295) per index procedure compared with USD 174 (95% CI, USD 150-185) and USD 113 (95% CI, USD 94-129) for reductions in aseptic loosening and early readmission, respectively. Compared with the base case, reductions in cost associated with a 10% reduction in periprosthetic joint infections, early readmissions, and aseptic loosening were USD 98, USD 93, and USD 75 per index procedure, respectively. The increase in QALYs for an equivalent reduction in periprosthetic joint infections, aseptic loosening, and early readmissions were 0.0036, 0.002, and 0.0004 QALYs, respectively. Results were most sensitive to age, baseline rate of readmission, periprosthetic joint infection, aseptic loosening, and the costs of readmission and revision THA.ConclusionsStrategies to reduce periprosthetic joint infections may have a greater effect on the cost and long-term effectiveness of THA than further enhancements in implant longevity. Reductions in the rate of readmission resulted in greater reductions in cost but not quality-of-life, and therefore had smaller effect on the net monetary benefit compared with aseptic loosening. Surgeons preferentially should engage in strategies focusing on periprosthetic joint infections to improve the value of THA care.Level of evidenceLevel II, economic and decision analysis.

BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is a beneficial and cost-effective procedure for patients with osteoarthritis. Recent initiatives to improve hospital quality of care include assessing unplanned hospital readmission rates. Patients presenting for THA have different indications and medical comorbidities that may impact rates of readmission.Questions/purposesThis study measured (1) the unplanned hospital readmission rate in primary THA, revision THA, and antibiotic-spacer staged revision THA to treat infection. Additionally, we determined (2) the medical and surgical causes of readmission; and (3) the risk factors associated with unplanned readmission.MethodsA total of 1415 patients (988 primary THA, 344 revision THA, 82 antibiotic-spacer staged revision THA to treat infection) from a single institution were included. All hospital readmissions within 90 days of discharge were reviewed. Patient demographics and medical comorbidities were included in a Cox proportional hazards model to assess risk of readmission.ResultsThe overall unplanned readmission rate was 4% at 30 days and 7% at 90 days. At 90 days, primary THA (5%) had a lower unplanned readmission rate than revision THA (10%, p < 0.001) and antibiotic-spacer staged revision THA (18%, p < 0.001). Medical diagnoses were responsible for almost one-fourth of unplanned readmissions, whereas over half of surgical readmissions were the result of dislocation, surgical site infection, and postoperative hematoma. Type of procedure, hospital stay greater than 5 days, cardiac valvular disease, diabetes with end-organ complications, and substance abuse were each associated with increased risk of unplanned readmission.ConclusionsHigher rates of unplanned hospital readmissions in revision THA rather than primary THA suggest that healthcare quality measures that incorporate readmission rates as a proxy for quality of care should distinguish between primary and revision procedures. Failure to do so may negatively impact tertiary referral hospitals that often care for patients requiring complex revision procedures.

BackgroundPatient, surgeon, health system, and device factors are all known to influence outcomes in THA. However, patient-related factors associated with an increased risk of early failure are poorly understood, particularly in elderly patients.Questions/purposesWe identified specific demographic and clinical characteristics associated with increased risk of early revision in Medicare patients with THA.MethodsThe Medicare 5% national sample administrative database was used to calculate the relative risk of revision within 12 months following primary THA as a function of baseline medical comorbidities in 56,030 Medicare patients who underwent primary THA between 1998 and 2010. The impact of 29 comorbid conditions on risk of early revision was examined using Cox regression, controlling for age, sex, race, US Census region, socioeconomic status, and all other baseline comorbidities.ResultsDepression, rheumatologic disease, psychoses, renal disease, chronic urinary tract infection, and congestive heart failure were associated with revision THA within 12 months of the index arthroplasty (p ≤ 0.038 for all comparisons; risk factors listed in order of significance).ConclusionsThis information is important when counseling elderly patients with THA regarding the risk of early failure and for risk stratifying publicly reported outcomes in Medicare patients with THA.

BackgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) and related interventions such as revision TKA and the treatment of infected TKAs are commonly performed procedures. Hospital readmission rates are used to measure hospital performance, but risk factors (both medical and surgical) for readmission after TKA, revision TKA, and treatment for the infected TKA have not been well characterized.Questions/purposesWe measured (1) the unplanned hospital readmission rate in primary TKA and revision TKA, including antibiotic-spacer staged revision TKA to treat infection. We also evaluated (2) the medical and surgical causes of readmission and (3) risk factors associated with unplanned hospital readmission.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included a total of 1408 patients (1032 primary TKAs, 262 revision TKAs, 113 revision of infected TKAs) from one institution. All hospital readmissions within 90 days of discharge were evaluated for timing and cause. Diagnoses at readmission were categorized as surgical or medical. Readmission risk was assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model that incorporated patient demographics and medical comorbidities.ResultsThe unplanned readmission rate for the entire cohort was 4% at 30 days and 8% at 90 days. At 90 days postoperatively, revision of an infected TKA had the highest readmission rate, followed by revision TKA, with primary TKA having the lowest rate. Approximately three-fourths of readmissions were the result of surgical causes, mostly infection, arthrofibrosis, and cellulitis, whereas the remainder of readmissions were the result of medical causes. Procedure type (primary TKA versus revision TKA or staged treatment for infected TKA), hospital stay more than 5 days, discharge destination, and a fluid/electrolyte abnormality were each associated with risk of unplanned readmission.ConclusionsPatients having revision TKA, whether for infection or other causes, are more likely to have an unplanned readmission to the hospital than are patients having primary TKA. When assessing hospital performance for TKA, it is important to distinguish among these surgical procedures.

BackgroundPatient, surgeon, health system, and device factors are all known to influence outcomes in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, patient-related factors associated with an increased risk of early failure are not well understood, particularly in elderly patients.Questions/purposesThe purpose of this study was to identify specific comorbid conditions associated with increased risk of early revision in Medicare patients undergoing TKA.MethodsA total of 117,903 Medicare patients who underwent primary TKA between 1998 and 2010 were identified from the Medicare 5% national sample administrative database and used to determine the relative risk of revision within 12 months after primary TKA as a function of baseline medical comorbidities. Cox regression was used to evaluate the impact of 29 comorbid conditions on risk of early failure controlling for age, sex, race, census region, socioeconomic status, and all other baseline comorbidities.ResultsThe most significant independent risk factors for revision TKA within 12 months were chronic pulmonary disease, depression, alcohol abuse, drug abuse, renal disease, hemiplegia or paraplegia, and obesity.ConclusionsThis information could be valuable to patients and their surgeons when making shared medical decisions regarding elective TKA and for risk-stratifying publicly reported outcomes in Medicare patients undergoing TKA.

BackgroundThe role of vancomycin in surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis and high-risk patients who are most likely to benefit remains unclear.Questions/purposesWe determined the impact of targeted use of vancomycin on (1) the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI); and (2) the incidence of PJI from methicillin-resistant organisms in patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at our institution.MethodsIn an effort to reduce PJI rates, we added vancomycin to cefazolin as surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis for patients undergoing revision TKA in October 2010. Internal data indicated a high rate of PJI in revision TKA and in particular PJI resulting from methicillin-resistant organisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE). We retrospectively reviewed infection control surveillance data on 414 revision TKAs performed between July 2008 and June 2012 (fiscal years 2009-2012).ResultsThe overall rate of PJI in fiscal years 2009-2010 among 190 patients undergoing revision TKA was 7.89%. After the change in surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, there was a significant reduction in PJI among patients undergoing revision TKA in fiscal years 2011-2012 to 3.13% (p = 0.046). In particular, we observed a reduction in PJI resulting from methicillin-resistant organisms over this same time period, from 4.21% to 0.89% (p = 0.049).ConclusionsTargeted use of vancomycin in patients undergoing revision TKA was effective in reducing the rate of PJI and PJI resulting from methicillin-resistant organisms in an institution with a high baseline rate of PJI due to MRSA and MRSE. Identification of high-risk subgroups of patients within a surgical population can help target infection prevention strategies to those who are most likely to benefit and thus minimize potential risks (eg, selection of resistant organisms, adverse drug events) associated with broader application of such an intervention.

BackgroundUnderstanding the type and magnitude of services that patients receive postdischarge and the financial impact of readmissions is crucial to assessing the feasibility of accepting bundled payments.Questions/purposesThe purposes of this study were to (1) determine the cost and service components of a 30-day total joint arthroplasty (TJA) episode of care; (2) analyze the portion of the total payment that is used for postdischarge services, including home care; and (3) to evaluate the frequency of readmissions and their impact on total episode-of-care payments.MethodsAll payments to Medicare providers (hospitals, postacute care facilities, physicians, and other healthcare providers) for services beginning with the index procedure and extending 30-days postdischarge were analyzed for 250 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing primary or revision TJA from a single institution over a 12 months. Payments and services were aggregated by procedure type and categorized as index procedure, postacute care, and related hospital readmissions.ResultsMean episode-of-care payments ranged from USD 25,568 for primary TJA in patients with no comorbidities to USD 50,648 for revision TJA in patients with major comorbidities or complications, with wide variability within and across procedures. Postdischarge payments accounted for 36% of total payments. A total of 49% of patients were transferred to postacute care facilities, accounting for 70% of postdischarge payments. The overall 30-day unplanned readmission rate was 10%, accounting for 11% of postdischarge payments.ConclusionsEpisode-of-care payments for TJAs vary widely depending on the type of procedure, patient comorbidities and complications, discharge disposition, and readmission rates. Postdischarge care accounted for more than one-third of total episode payments and varied substantially across patients and procedures.