Financial Distress and Discussing the Cost of Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Total joint arthroplasty is expensive. Out-of-pocket cost to patients undergoing elective total joint arthroplasty varies considerably depending on their insurance coverage but can range into the tens of thousands of dollars. The goal of this study is to evaluate the association between patient financial stress and interest in discussing costs associated with surgery.

METHODS

One hundred forty-one patients undergoing elective total hip and knee arthroplasty at a suburban academic medical center were enrolled and completed questionnaires about cost prior to surgery. Questions regarding if and when doctors should discuss the cost of healthcare with patients, evaluating if patients were affected by the cost of healthcare and to what extent, and financial security scores to assess current financial situation were included. The primary outcome was the answer to the question of whether a doctor should discuss cost with patients.

RESULTS

Financial stress was found to be associated with patient experience of hardship due to cost of care [P = .004], likelihood to turn down a test or treatment due to copayment [P = .029], to decline a test or treatment due to other costs [P = .003], to experience difficulty affording basic necessities [P = .008], and to have used up all or most of their savings to pay for surgery [P = .011]. In total, 84% of patients reported that they wanted to discuss surgical costs with their doctors, but 90% did not want to do so at every visit.

CONCLUSION

Total joint arthroplasty creates considerable out-of-pocket costs that may affect patient decisions. These findings help elucidate important patient concerns that orthopedic surgeons should account for when discussing elective arthroplasty with patients.

Reliability of the classification of proximal femur fractures: Does clinical experience matter?

BACKGROUND

Radiographic fracture classification helps with research on prognosis and treatment. AO/OTA classification into fracture type has shown to be reliable, but further classification of fractures into subgroups reduces the interobserver agreement and takes a considerable amount of practice and experience in order to master.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We assessed: (1) differences between more and less experienced trauma surgeons based on hip fractures treated per year, years of experience, and the percentage of their time dedicated to trauma, (2) differences in the interobserver agreement between classification into fracture type, group, and subgroup, and (3) differences in the interobserver agreement when assessing fracture stability compared to classifying fractures into type, group and subgroup.

METHODS

This study used the Science of Variation Group to measure factors associated with variation in interobserver agreement on classification of proximal femur fractures according to the AO/OTA classification on radiographs. We selected 30 anteroposterior radiographs from 1061 patients aged 55 years or older with an isolated fracture of the proximal femur, with a spectrum of fracture types proportional to the full database. To measure the interobserver agreement the Fleiss' kappa was determined and bootstrapping (resamples = 1000) was used to calculate the standard error, z statistic, and 95% confidence intervals. We compared the Kappa values of surgeons with more experience to less experienced surgeons.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the Kappa values on each classification level (type, group, subgroup) between more and less experienced surgeons. When all surgeons were combined into one group, the interobserver reliability was the greatest for classifying the fractures into type (kappa, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97; p < 0.001), reflecting almost perfect agreement. When comparing the kappa values between classes (type, group, subgroup), we found statistically significant differences between each class. Substantial agreement was found in the clinically relevant groups stable/unstable trochanteric, displaced/non-displaced femoral neck, and femoral head fractures (kappa, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.67, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to a growing body of evidence that relatively simple distinctions are more reliable and that this is independent of surgeon experience.

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome After Distal Radius Fracture Is Uncommon and Is Often Associated With Fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is frequently diagnosed in patients recovering from surgery or injury. The symptoms and signs included in consensus diagnostic criteria for CRPS are expected after injury. Categorizing symptoms and signs that occur on a continuum as disproportionate or not is subjective and prone to bias. Psychiatrists and psychologists do not diagnose CRPS and instead measure and treat anxiety and catastrophic thinking on its continuum. Given the expected variation in subjective diagnoses such as CRPS, this study addresses factors associated with use of this diagnosis and how it influences care.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Among patients recovering from fracture of the distal radius, what factors are associated with the diagnosis of CRPS? (2) Are patients diagnosed with CRPS after distal radius fractures, as opposed to those without CRPS, more likely to have a bone scan, stellate ganglion block, therapy, or subsequent surgery?

METHODS

Using the Truven database, we identified 59,765 patients treated for a distal radius fracture from 2012 to 2014, of whom 114 (0.19%) were diagnosed with CRPS. The Truven Health MarketScan database is an administrative claims data set of commercially insured patients and this analysis only included patients with complete enrollment from 2012 through 2014. Bivariate analyses sought differences between patients diagnosed with and patients not diagnosed with CRPS. All factors with p < 0.05 were included in a multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

The covariates older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.029; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.011-1.048; p = 0.002), gender (women at greater risk, OR, 3.86; CI, 1.99-7.49; p < 0.001), concomitant fracture of the distal ulna (OR, 1.54; CI, 1.05-2.23; p = 0.029), open fracture (OR, 0.414; CI, 0.192-0.895; p = 0.025), and comorbid fibromyalgia (OR, 16.0; CI, 4.92-51.8; p < 0.001) were independently associated with a diagnosis of CRPS among patients recovering from a fracture of the distal radius. Patients diagnosed with CRPS are more likely than other patients with a distal radius fracture to have had a bone scan (OR, 66.0; CI, 8.19-532; p < 0.001), physical or occupational therapy (OR, 3.89; CI, 2.68-5.67; p < 0.001), and subsequent wrist surgery (OR, 2.52; CI, 1.65-3.84; p < 0.001). No one had a stellate ganglion injection.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that a coded diagnosis of CPRS is uncommonly applied to patients on the higher range of pain, stiffness, and limitations after fracture of the distal radius-most commonly in women and in association with another nonspecific, objectively unverifiable diagnosis (fibromyalgia)-and that this label may lead to more testing and invasive treatment. Future research should address the utility and value of diagnoses that create subjective categories for aspects of human illness that occur on a continuum.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.