A Comparison of Relative Value Units in Primary Versus Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Performing Revision Arthroplasty Increases Surgeon and Practice Volumes Through the Generation of Subsequent Cases: A Retrospective Study

Background

Revision total knee (TKR) and hip (THR) arthroplasty surgeries are disincentivized due to unfavorable reimbursement rates, surgical times, and complication rates. Our study investigates secondary benefits of performing these surgeries by generating subsequent cases for surgeons and practices.

Methods

Patients undergoing TKR and THR between April 1, 2011, and January 1, 2019, at our tertiary academic institution were analyzed. Patients were identified with Current Procedural Terminology codes for TKR and THR. We calculated a subsequent surgery rate on the same or different joint by the initial surgeon or another surgeon within the practice to determine the procedure yield after initial revision arthroplasty.

Results

One thousand six hundred twenty-five patients met inclusion criteria. Six hundred forty-nine (39.9%) patients received at least one subsequent procedure on any joint by any orthopaedic surgeon in the practice. Four hundred five patients (24.9%) underwent another procedure on any joint by the same surgeon. Two hundred sixty patients (16.0%) underwent another procedure on the same joint by the same surgeon, with 109 cases (41.9%) being a planned second stage of a 2-stage revision for infection. Two hundred eighty-five patients (17.5%) underwent another procedure on a different joint by the same surgeon, with 122 of these patients (42.8%) undergoing at least one primary total hip or knee arthroplasty.

Conclusions

TKRs and THRs can increase surgeon and practice volumes through the generation of future cases, which are primarily the second stage of a 2-stage revision or primary joint arthroplasties on other joints.

Titanium-Titanium Junctions in the Knee Corrode, Generating Damage Similar to the Hip

BACKGROUND

Previous studies identified corrosion between the modular tibial components of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) devices. In this study, we investigated the damage modes present in titanium-titanium (Ti-Ti) junctions in the knee. We asked: under typical in vivo cyclic loading conditions, will the same alloy damage modes from TKA devices resemble those documented in the hip?

METHODS

A total of 50 paired titanium alloy tibial baseplates and stems were collected and semi-quantitatively analyzed using Goldberg corrosion scoring. To characterize damage, a subsection of moderately and severely corroded components was sectioned and imaged using scanning electron and digital optical microscopy.

RESULTS

Of the 100 device components, 95% showed visual evidence of corrosion. The initial contact area between the stem and bore generally occurred 3 mm from the stem taper base. Scanning electron microscopy revealed four damage modes, including oxide film formation, crevice corrosion, selective dissolution, and pitting.

CONCLUSIONS

Each of the damage modes identified in modular Ti-Ti tibial junctions was previously reported by total hip arthroplasty retrieval studies. Cumulatively, our results suggest that mechanically assisted crevice corrosion promoted this damage in vivo.

Rising Costs and Diminishing Surgeon Reimbursement From Primary to Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of Medicare Advantage and Commercial Insurance

BACKGROUND

Revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) is a resource-intensive procedure addressing failed primary total joint hip (total hip arthroplasty [THA]) and knee arthroplasty (total knee arthroplasty [TKA]). Despite predictions of increased demand, reimbursement for rTJA has not kept pace with increasing costs and may be insufficient compared with primary procedures. The study aimed to highlight the diminishing surgeon reimbursement between primary and revision THA (rTHA) and TKA.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of billing data for primary and rTHA and TKA procedures from a single institution between 2019 and 2022. Insurance claims and charges data were provided by a local affiliate of a major national carrier which includes Medicare Advantage (MA) and commercial patients. Using insurance data, the study evaluates the total surgery costs for primary and rTHA and TKA and the individual charges that make up the total surgery cost.

RESULTS

Nine hundred five patients insured by the same carrier, who underwent a primary or rTJA, were identified. Irrespective of MA or commercial insurance, the average surgery cost for a primary THA was $26,043, compared with $53,456 for rTHA. Surgeon reimbursement for primary THA was 20% ($5,323) of the total surgery cost. Despite the doubled surgery cost for rTHA, surgeon reimbursement was 10% ($5,257) of the total surgery cost. Primary TKA surgery costs were $24,489, while revision costs were $43,074. Surgeon reimbursement for primary TKA was 20% ($4,918) of the total surgery cost, while reimbursement for revision TKA was 13% ($5,560). MA reimbursement was markedly lower than commercial reimbursement for primary and revision cases.

CONCLUSION

Despite the higher total costs for rTJA, surgeon reimbursement is disproportionately diminished. The findings highlight the lack of incentive for revision cases. Surgeon reimbursement from MA and commercially insured patients for rTJA remains inadequate. This may limit patient access-to-care, leading to suboptimal outcomes and increased healthcare utilization.

Is Hospital-Based Outpatient Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Safe? An Analysis of 2,171 Outpatient Aseptic Revision Procedures

BACKGROUND

Outpatient primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been well-established as a safe and effective procedure; however, the safety of outpatient revision TKA remains unclear. Therefore, this study utilized a large database to compare outcomes between outpatient and inpatient revision TKA.

METHODS

An all-payor database was queried to identify patients undergoing revision TKA from 2010 to 2022. Patients who had diagnosis codes related to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) were excluded. Outpatient surgery was defined as a length of stay < 24 hours. Cohorts were matched by age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, comorbidities (diabetes, obesity, tobacco use), components revised (1-versus 2-component), and revision etiology. Medical complications at 90 days and surgical complications at 1 and 2 years postoperatively were evaluated through multivariate logistic regression. A total of 4,342 aseptic revision TKAs were included.

RESULTS

No differences in patient characteristics, procedure type, or revision etiologies were seen between groups. The outpatient cohort had a lower risk of PJI (odds ratio (OR): 0.547, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.337 to 0.869; P = .012), wound dehiscence (OR: 0.393, 95% CI: 0.225 to 0.658; P < .001), transfusion (OR: 0.241, 95% CI: 0.055 to 0.750; P = .027), reoperation (OR: 0.508, 95% CI: 0.305 to 0.822; P = .007), and any complication (OR: 0.696, 95% CI: 0.584 to 0.829; P < .001) at 90 days postoperatively. At 1 year and 2 years postoperatively, outpatient revision TKA patients had a lower incidence of revision for PJI (OR: 0.332, 95% CI: 0.131 to 0.743; P = .011 and OR: 0.446, 95% CI; 0.217 to 0.859; P = .020, respectively) and all-cause revision (OR: 0.518, 95% CI: 0.377 to 0.706; P < .001 and OR: 0.548, 95% CI: 0.422 to 0.712; P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that revision TKA can be safely performed on an outpatient basis in appropriately selected patients who do not have an increased risk of adverse events relative to inpatient revision TKA. However, we could not ascertain case complexity in either cohort, and despite controlling for several potential confounders, other less tangible differences could exist between groups.

Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty Places a Disproportionate Burden on Surgeons: A Comparison Using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX)

BACKGROUND

Perceived surgeon workload of performing primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging to quantify. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX) survey was developed to quantify experiences following aviation and has been applied to healthcare fields. Our purposes were to 1) quantify the workload endured by surgeons who are performing primary and revision TKA and THA and 2) compare these values to their Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 5 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeons completed NASA TLX surveys following primary and revision TKA/THA cases. A total of 122 surveys consisting of 70 TKA (48 primaries and 22 revisions) and 55 THA surveys (38 primaries and 17 revisions) were completed. Patient demographics and surgical variables were recorded. Final NASA TLX workloads were compared to 2021 CMS work relative value units.

RESULTS

Compared to primary TKA, revision TKA had 176% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 233% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 150% increased physical burden (P < .001). Compared to primary THA, revision THA had 106% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 96% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 91% increased physical burden (P < .001). Operative time was higher in revision versus primary TKA (118 versus 84.5 minutes, P = .05) and THA (150 versus 115 minutes, P = .001). Based upon 2021 CMS data, revision TKA and THA would need to be compensated by an additional 36% and 12.3%, respectively, to parallel intraoperative efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

Revision hip and knee arthroplasty places a major mental and physical workload upon surgeons and is disproportionately compensated by CMS.

Are Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons Appropriately Compensated for Treating Acetabular Fractures? An Analysis of Operative Times and Relative Value Units

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the work relative value units (RVUs) attributed per minute of operative time (wRVU/min) in fixation of acetabular fractures, evaluate surgical factors that influence wRVU/min, and compare wRVU/min with other procedures.

METHODS

DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTING

Level 1 academic center.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

Two hundred fifty-one operative acetabular fractures (62 A, B, C) from 2015 to 2021.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

Work relative value unit per minute of operative time for each acetabular current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Surgical approach, patient positioning, total room time, and surgeon experience were collected. Comparison wRVU/min were collected from the literature.

RESULTS

The mean wRVU per surgical minute for each CPT code was (1) CPT 27226 (isolated wall fracture): 0.091 wRVU/min, (2) CPT 27227 (isolated column or transverse fracture): 0.120 wRVU/min, and (3) CPT 27228 (associated fracture types): 0.120 wRVU/min. Of fractures with single approaches, anterior approaches generated the least wRVU/min (0.091 wRVU/min, P = 0.0001). Average nonsurgical room time was 82.1 minutes. Surgeon experience ranged from 3 to 26 years with operative time decreasing as surgeon experience increased ( P = 0.03). As a comparison, the wRVU/min for primary and revision hip arthroplasty have been reported as 0.26 and 0.249 wRVU/min, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The wRVUs allocated per minute of operative time for acetabular fractures is less than half of other reported hip procedures and lowest for isolated wall fractures. There was a significant amount of nonsurgical room time that should be accounted for in compensation models. This information should be used to ensure that orthopaedic trauma surgeons are being appropriately supported for managing these fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Inflation-adjusted medicare physician reimbursement for adult spinal deformity surgery substantially declined from 2002 to 2020

PURPOSE

Physician fees for orthopaedic surgeons by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are increasingly scrutinized. The present retrospective review aims to assess whether adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries are properly valued for Medicare reimbursement.

METHODS

Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes related to posterior fusion of spinal deformity of ≤ 6, 7-12, and ≥ 13 vertebral levels, as well as additional arthrodesis and osteotomy levels, were assessed for (1) Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) from 2002 to 2020, calculated using physician fee data from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool; and (2) work relative value units (RVUs) per operative minute, using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2020, all CPT codes for ASD surgery had negative inflation-adjusted CAGRs (range, - 18.49% to - 27.66%). Mean physician fees for spinal fusion declined by 26.02% (CAGR, - 1.66%) in ≤ 6-level fusion, 27.91% (CAGR, - 1.80%) in 7- to 12-level fusion, and 28.25% (CAGR, - 1.83%) ≥ 13-level fusion. Fees for both 7-12 (P < 0.00001) and ≥ 13 levels (P < 0.00001) declined more than those for fusion of ≤ 6 vertebral levels. RVU per minute was lower for 7- to 12-level and ≥ 13-level (P < 0.00001 for both) ASD surgeries than for ≤ 6-level.

CONCLUSIONS

Reimbursement for ASD surgery declined overall. CAGR for fusions of ≥ 7 levels were lower than those for fusions of ≤ 6 levels. For 2012-2018, ≥ 7-level fusions had lower RVU per minute than ≤ 6-level fusions. Revaluation of Medicare reimbursement for longer-level ASD surgeries may be warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Medicaid Patients Travel Disproportionately Farther for Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Access to high-quality care for revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) is poorly understood but may vary based on insurance type. This study investigated distance traveled for hip and knee rTJA based on insurance type.

METHODS

A total of 317 revision hips and 431 revision knees performed between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Cluster sampling was used to select primary hips and knees for comparison. Median driving distance was compared based upon procedure and insurance type.

RESULTS

Revision hip and knee patients traveled 18.2 and 11.0 miles farther for surgery compared to primary hip and knee patients (P ≤ .001). For hip rTJA, Medicaid patients traveled farther than Medicare patients followed by commercially insured patients with median distances traveled of 98.4, 67.2, and 35.6 miles, respectively (P = .016). Primary hip patients traveled the same distance regardless of insurance type (P = .397). For knee rTJA, Medicaid patients traveled twice as far as Medicare and commercially insured patients (medians of 85.0, 43.5, and 42.2 miles respectively, P ≤ .046). Primary knee patients showed a similar pattern (P = .264). Age and ASA-PS classification did not indicate greater comorbidity in Medicaid patients.

CONCLUSION

Insurance type may influence rTJA referrals, with disproportionate referral of Medicaid and Medicare patients to nonlocal care centers. In addition to patient burden, these patterns potentially present a financial burden to facilities accepting referrals. Strategies to improve equitable access to rTJA, while maintaining the highest and most economical standards of care for patients, providers, and hospitals, are encouraged.

No Association Between Hospital Volume and Early Second Revision Rate in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the Dutch Orthopaedic Register

BACKGROUND

Revision knee arthroplasty (R-KA) is rising globally. Technical difficulty of R-KA varies from liner exchange to full revision. Centralization has been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity rates. The present study aimed to evaluate the association between hospital R-KA volume and overall second revision rate, as well as revision rate for different types of revision.

METHODS

The R -KAs between 2010 and 2020 with available data on the primary KA in the Dutch Orthopaedic Arthroplasty Register were included. Minor revisions were excluded. Implant data and anonymous patient characteristics were obtained from the Dutch Orthopaedic Arthroplasty Register. Survival analyses and competing risk analysis were performed per volume category (≤12, 13 to 24, or ≥25 cases/year) at 1, 3, and 5 years following R-KA. There were 8,072 R-KA cases available. Median follow-up was 3.7 years (range 0 to 13.7 years). There were a total of 1,460 second revisions (18.1%) at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between second revision rates of the three volume groups. Adjusted hazard ratio for second revision were 0.97 (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.11) for hospitals with 13 to 24 cases/year and 0.94 (CI 0.83 to 1.07) with ≥25 cases/year compared to low volume (≤12 cases/year). Type of revision did not influence second revision rate.

CONCLUSION

Second revision rate of R-KA does not seem to be dependent on hospital volume or type of revision in the Netherlands.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Observational registry study.

Objective assessment of physician work in infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is obtain robust objective data from the Vascular Quality Initiative on physician work in infrainguinal artery bypass surgery. Operative time, patient comorbidities, anatomical complexity, consequences of adverse outcomes, and postoperative length of stay all factor into procedure relative value unit assignment and physician reimbursement.

METHODS

Baseline demographics and comorbidities were identified among 74,920 infrainguinal bypass surgeries in Vascular Quality Initiative between 2003 and 2022. Investigation into areas of progressive complexity over time was conducted. Bypasses were divided into 10 cohorts based on inflow and target arteries and conduit type. Mean operative times, lengths of stay, major morbidity rates, and 90-day mortality rates were identified across the various bypasses. Comparison of relative value unit per minute service time during the acute inpatient hospital admission was performed between the most 4 common bypasses and 14 commonly performed highly invasive major surgeries across several subdisciplines.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing infrainguinal arterial bypass have an advanced combination of medical complexities highlighted by diabetes mellitus in 40%, hypertension in 88%, body mass index >30 in 30%, coronary artery disease that has clinically manifested in 31%, renal insufficiency in 19%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 27%, and prior lower extremity arterial intervention (endovascular and open combined) in >50%. The need for concomitant endarterectomy at the proximal anastomosis site of infrainguinal bypasses has increased over time (P < .001). The indication for bypass being limb-threatening ischemia as defined by ischemic rest pain, pedal tissue loss, or acute ischemia has also increased over time (P < .001), indicating more advanced extent of arterial occlusion in patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass. Finally, there has been a significant (P < .001) progression in the percentage of patients who have undergone a prior ipsilateral lower extremity endovascular intervention at the time of their bypass (increasing from 9.9% in 2003-2010 to 31.9% in the 2018-2022 eras). Among the 18 procedures investigated, the 4 most commonly performed infrainguinal bypasses were included in the analysis. These ranked 14th, 16th, 17th and 18th as the most poorly compensated per minute service time during the acute operative inpatient stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery has an objectively undervalued physician work relative value unit compared with other highly invasive major surgeries across several subdisciplines. There are elements of progressive complexity in infrainguinal bypass patients over the past 20 years among a patient cohort with a very high comorbidity rate, indicating escalating intensity for infrainguinal bypass.

Time Required for Planned and Unplanned Episodes of Care in Aseptic Hip and Knee Revision Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Studies indicate aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) requires much more effort but is reimbursed less than primary procedures per minute work time. This study quantified planned and unplanned work performed by the surgeon and/or their team during the entire episode of care "reimbursement window" and compared it to allowed reimbursement times by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

METHODS

Between October, 2010, and December, 2020, all unilateral aseptic rTHA and rTKA procedures performed by a single surgeon at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Time dedicated to planned work was calculated from surgery scheduling to 90 days postoperative. Impromptu patient inquiries and treatments after discharge but within the episode of care, involving the surgeon/surgeon team constituted unplanned work. Planned and unplanned work minutes were summed and divided by the number of patients reviewed to obtain average minutes of work per patient. Work time was compared to CMS allowable times for rTHA (617 minutes) and rTKA (520 minutes).

RESULTS

There were 292 Aseptic rTKA and 63 aseptic rTHA procedures included. Based upon CMS allowable times per patient there were a mean of 4.4 hours (267 minutes) of uncompensated care time per rTKA patient and a mean of 2.4 hours (141 minutes) of uncompensated care time per rTHA patient.

CONCLUSION

Aseptic revisions are substantially more complex than primaries, requiring work effort that is not commensurate with current reimbursements. Financially disincentivizing surgeons to care for patients requiring revision surgery could reduce patient access to care when high quality care is needed the most.

Mark-Up Trends in Contemporary Medicare Primary and Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Understanding mark-up ratios (MRs), the ratio between a healthcare institution's submitted charge and the Medicare payment received, for high-volume orthopaedic procedures is imperative to inform policy about price transparency and reducing surprise billing. This analysis examined the MRs for primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) services to Medicare beneficiaries between 2013 and 2019 across healthcare settings and geographic regions.

METHODS

A large dataset was queried for all THA and TKA procedures performed by orthopaedic surgeons between 2013 and 2019, using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes for the most frequently used services. Yearly MRs, service counts, average submitted charges, average allowed payments, and average Medicare payments were analyzed. Trends in MRs were assessed. We evaluated 9 THA HCPCS codes, averaging 159,297 procedures a year provided by a mean of 5,330 surgeons. We evaluated 6 TKA HCPCS codes, averaging 290,244 procedures a year provided by a mean of 7,308 surgeons.

RESULTS

For knee arthroplasty procedures, a decrease was noted for HCPCS code 27438 (patellar arthroplasty with prosthesis) over the study period (8.30 to 6.62; P = .016) and HCPCS code 27447 (TKA) had the highest median (interquartile range [IQR]) MR (4.73 [3.64 to 6.30]). For revision knee procedures, the highest median (IQR) MR was for HCPCS code 27488 (removal of knee prosthesis; 6.12 [3.83-8.22]). While no trends were noted for both primary and revision hip arthroplasty, median (IQR) MRs in 2019 for primary hip procedures ranged from 3.83 (hemiarthroplasty) to 5.06 (conversion of previous hip surgery to THA) and HCPCS code 27130 (total hip arthroplasty) had a median (IQR) MR of 4.66 (3.58-6.44). For revision hip procedures, MRs ranged from 3.79 (open treatment of femoral fracture or prosthetic arthroplasty) to 6.10 (revision of THA femoral component). Wisconsin had the highest median MR by state (>9) for primary knee, revision knee, and primary hip procedures.

CONCLUSION

The MRs for primary and revision THA and TKA procedures were strikingly high, as compared to nonorthopaedic procedures. These findings represent high levels of excess charges billed, which may pose serious financial burdens to patients and must be taken into consideration in future policy discussions to avoid price inflation.

Are Orthopedic Hand Surgeons Undercompensated for Time Spent in the Operating Room? A Study of Relative Value Units

BACKGROUND

This study aims to investigate whether compensation is equitable among the most commonly performed orthopedic hand surgeries and when compared with general orthopedic procedures.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all orthopedic procedures, from 2016 to 2018, performed more than 150 times using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Physician work relative value unit (wRVU) data were obtained from the 2020 US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services fee schedule. Linear regressions were used to determine whether there was an association among wRVU, operative time, and wRVU per hour (wRVU/h). Reimbursement for hand surgery CPT codes was compared with that of nonhand orthopedic CPT codes. The CPT codes were stratified into quartile cohorts based on mean operative time, major complication rate, mortality rate, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, reoperation rate, and readmission rate. Student t tests were used to compare wRVU/h between cohorts.

RESULTS

Forty-two hand CPT codes were identified from 214 orthopedic CPT codes, accounting for 32 333 hand procedures. The median wRVU/h was significantly lower for procedures in the longest operative time quartile compared with the shortest operative time quartile (P < .001). Compared with hand procedures, nonhand procedures were found to have significantly higher mean operative time (P < .001), mean complication rate (P < .001), mean wRVU (P = .001), and mean wRVU/h (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2020 Physician wRVU scale does not allocate proportional wRVUs to orthopedic hand procedures with longer mean operative times. There is a decrease in mean reimbursement rate for hand procedures with longer mean operative time. When compared with general orthopedic procedures, hand procedures have a lower mean wRVU/h and complication rate.

How to Create an Orthopaedic Arthroplasty Administrative Database Project: A Step-by-Step Guide Part I: Study Design

BACKGROUND

Use of clinical and administrative databases in orthopaedic surgery research has grown substantially in recent years. It is estimated that approximately 10% of all published lower extremity arthroplasty research have been database studies. The aim of this review is to serve as a guide on how to (1) design, (2) execute, and (3) publish an orthopaedic administrative database arthroplasty project.

METHODS

In part I, we discuss how to develop a research question and choose a database (when databases should/should not be used), detailing advantages/disadvantages of those most commonly used. To date, the most commonly published databases in orthopaedic research have been the National Inpatient Sample, Medicare, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, and those provided by PearlDiver. General advantages of most database studies include accessibility, affordability compared to prospective research studies, ease of use, large sample sizes, and the ability to identify trends and aggregate outcomes of multiple health care systems/providers.

RESULTS

Disadvantages of most databases include their retrospective observational nature, limitations of procedural/billing coding, relatively short follow-up, limited ability to control for confounding variables, and lack of functional/patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although this study is not all-encompassing, we hope it will serve as a starting point for those interested in conducting and critically reviewing lower extremity arthroplasty database studies.

Health Policy Views and Political Advocacy of Arthroplasty Surgeons: A Survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Members

BACKGROUND

The American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) is the largest specialty society for arthroplasty surgeons in the United States and is dedicated to education, research, and advocacy. The purpose of this study was to identify the health policy views of AAHKS members and better characterize their advocacy participation.

METHODS

A 22 question survey was electronically distributed multiple times via email link to all 3,638 United States members of AAHKS who were in practice or training in 2022. Study results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

There were 311 responses (9%), with 18% of respondents being within 5 years of practice and 38% having more than 20 years of practice. Respondents identified as Republicans (40%), Independents (37%), and Democrats (21%). Top policy issues included preserving physician reimbursement and equitable fee schedule representation (95%), the burden of prior authorization (53%), the impact of Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services regulations (39%), and medical liability and tort reform (39%). Members ranked maintaining appropriate physician reimbursement (44%) and advocating for patients (37%) as the top benefits to participation in advocacy. A majority of respondents (81%) stated that they spend more time on presurgery optimization now than 10 years ago. The most common barrier to advocacy participation was a lack of time (77%).

CONCLUSION

Responding AAHKS members are well-informed, politically engaged, patient-oriented, and eager for a voice in policy decisions that affect the professional future of arthroplasty surgeons. These results can be used to help direct strategic efforts of the AAHKS Advocacy Committee to further increase advocacy efforts.

Correlation of Relative Value Units With Surgical Complexity and Physician Workload: A Contemporary Nationwide Analysis of Orthopaedic Procedures

INTRODUCTION

Although previous studies have demonstrated inconsistencies between surgeon work and reimbursement, no previous study has calculated expected relative value units (RVUs) based on procedure-specific variables. Our study aimed to evaluate how measures of physician workload and surgical complexity correlate with the work RVUs (wRVUs) assigned to orthopaedic procedures and compare our predicted wRVUs with actual wRVUs.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was used to identify orthopaedic surgeries with the highest procedural volume in 2019. For each Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code, variables related to surgical complexity and postoperative management were retrieved. A multivariable linear regression was conducted, and R2 values were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 229,792 cases from the top 20 CPT codes by frequency in 2019 were identified. Base RVU values ranged from 7.03 mRVUs for arthroscopic meniscectomy to 30.28 mRVUs for revision total hip arthroplasty. A total of 15 (75%) of the projected mRVUs were lower than the actual mRVU of the procedure. For the 5 (25%) procedures with mRVU projections higher than actual values, the largest differences were seen for CPT codes 29,888 (arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] repair; difference: 7.81), 22,630 (posterior arthrodesis of the lumbar interbody; difference: 7.75), and 27,487 (revision total knee arthroplasty; difference: 4.04).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis demonstrates that current orthopaedic wRVUs do not appropriately compensate for objective measures of overall complexity as it relates to each procedure. Significant undercompensation in projected RVUs was noted for several high-volume orthopaedic procedures including arthroscopic ACL repair and revision total knee arthroplasty.

Comparison of Relative Value Units and 30-Day Outcomes Between Primary and Revision Pediatric Spinal Deformity Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the relative value units (RVUs) and 30-day outcomes between primary and revision pediatric spinal deformity (PSD) surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PSD surgery is frequently complicated by the need for reoperation. However, there is limited literature on physician reimbursement rates and short-term outcomes following primary versus revision spinal deformity surgery in the pediatric population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study utilizes data obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Pediatric database. Patients between 10 and 18 years of age who underwent posterior spinal deformity surgery between 2012 and 2018 were included. Univariate and multivariate regression were used to assess the independent impact of revision surgery on RVUs and postoperative outcomes, including 30-day readmission, reoperation, morbidity, and complications.

RESULTS

The study cohort included a total of 15,055 patients, with 358 patients who underwent revision surgery. Patients in the revision group were more likely to be younger and male sex. Revision surgery more commonly required osteotomy (13.7% vs. 8.3%, P =0.002).Univariate analysis revealed higher total RVUs (71.09 vs. 60.51, P <0.001), RVUs per minute (0.27 vs. 0.23, P <0.001), readmission rate (6.7% vs. 4.0%, P =0.012), and reoperation rate (7.5% vs. 3.3%, P <0.001) for the revision surgery group. Morbidity rates were found to be statistically similar. In addition, deep surgical site infection, pulmonary embolism, and urinary tract infection were more common in the revision group. After controlling for baseline differences in multivariate regression, the differences in total RVUs, RVUs per minute, reoperation rate, and rate of pulmonary embolism between primary and revision surgery remained statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Revision PSD surgery was found to be assigned appropriately higher mean total RVUs and RVUs per minute corresponding to the higher operative complexity compared with primary surgery. Revision surgery was also associated with poorer 30-day outcomes, including higher frequencies of reoperation and pulmonary embolism.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Impact of Preoperative Opioid Use on Patient-Reported Outcomes after Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Propensity Matched Analysis

This is a retrospective study. Prior studies have characterized the deleterious effects of narcotic use in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While there is an increasing revision arthroplasty burden, data on the effect of narcotic use in the revision surgery setting remain limited. Our aim was to characterize the effect of active narcotic use at the time of revision TKA on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A total of 330 consecutive patients who underwent revision TKA and completed both pre- and postoperative PROMs was identified. Due to differences in baseline characteristics, 99 opioid users were matched to 198 nonusers using the nearest-neighbor propensity score matching. Pre- and postoperative knee disability and osteoarthritis outcome score physical function (KOOS-PS), patient reported outcomes measurement information system short form (PROMIS SF) physical, PROMIS SF mental, and physical SF 10A scores were evaluated. Opioid use was identified by the medication reconciliation on the day of surgery. Propensity score-matched opioid users had significantly lower preoperative PROMs than the nonuser for KOOS-PS (45.2 vs. 53.8, p < 0.01), PROMIS SF physical (37.2 vs. 42.5, p < 0.01), PROMIS SF mental (44.2 vs. 51.3, p < 0.01), and physical SF 10A (34.1 vs. 36.8, p < 0.01). Postoperatively, opioid-users demonstrated significantly lower scores across all PROMs: KOOS-PS (59.2 vs. 67.2, p < 0.001), PROMIS SF physical (43.2 vs. 52.4, p < 0.001), PROMIS SF mental (47.5 vs. 58.9, p < 0.001), and physical SF 10A (40.5 vs. 49.4, p < 0.001). Propensity score-matched opioid-users demonstrated a significantly smaller absolute increase in scores for PROMIS SF Physical (p = 0.03) and Physical SF 10A (p < 0.01), as well as an increased hospital length of stay (p = 0.04). Patients who are actively taking opioids at the time of revision TKA report significantly lower preoperative and postoperative outcome scores. These patients are more likely to have longer hospital stays. The apparent negative effect on patient reported outcomes after revision TKA provides clinically useful data for surgeons in engaging patients in a preoperative counseling regarding narcotic use prior to revision TKA to optimize outcomes.

Surgeons Experience More Physiologic Stress and Strain During Revision Than Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) procedures are more complex than primary TKA and THA, but their physiologic burden to the surgeon has not been quantified. While rTKA and rTHA have longer operative times, it is unknown whether differences exist in stress and strain compared to primary TKA and primary THA. The study was conducted to elicit whether differences exist in surgeon physiological response while performing rTKA and rTKA compared to primary TKA and primary THA.

METHODS

We evaluated a prospective cohort study of 70 consecutive cases (23 primary TKAs, 12 primary THAs, 16 rTKAs, and 19 rTHAs). Two high-volume fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons wore a smart vest that recorded cardiorespiratory data while performing primary THA, primary TKA, rTHA, and rTKA. Heart rate (beats/minute), stress index (correlates with sympathetic activation), respiratory rate (respirations/minute), minute ventilation (L/min), and energy expenditure (Calories) were collected for every case, along with patient body mass index (kilograms/meter²) and working operative time (minutes). T-tests were used to assess for differences between the two groups.

RESULTS

Compared to primary TKA, performing rTKAs had a significantly higher surgeon stress index (17 versus 15; P = .035), heart rate (104 versus 99; P = .007), energy expenditure per case (409 versus 297; P = .002), and a significantly lower heart rate variability (11 versus 12; P = .006). Compared to primary THA, performing rTHA had a significantly higher energy expenditure per case (431 versus 307; P = .007) and trended towards having a higher surgeon stress index (16 versus 14; P = .272) and a lower heart rate variability (11 versus 12; P = .185), although it did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons experience higher physiological stress and strain when performing rTKA and rTHA compared to primary TKA and primary THA. This study provides objective data on what many surgeons feel and should promote further research on the specific stress and strain felt by surgeons who perform revision arthroplasty procedures.

Are Foot & Ankle Surgeons Being Adequately Compensated for Ankle Fractures? - An Analysis of Relative Value Units

The current relative value units (RVU)-based system is built to reflect the varying presentation of ankle fractures (uni-malleolar vs bi-malleolar vs tri-malleolar) by assigning individual RVUs to different fracture complexities. However, no study has evaluated whether the current RVUs reflect an appropriate compensation per unit time following open reduction internal fixation for uni-malleolar versus bi-malleolar versus tri-malleolar ankle fractures. The 2012 to 2017 American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files were queried using current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation for uni-malleolar (CPT-27766,CPT-27769,CPT-27792), bi-malleolar (CPT-27814), and tri-malleolar (CPT-27822,CPT-27823) ankle fractures. A total of 7830 (37.2%) uni-malleolar, 7826 (37.2%) bi-malleolar and 5391 (25.6%) tri-malleolar ankle fractures were retrieved. Total RVUs, Mean RVU/minute and Reimbursement rate ($/min) and Mean Reimbursement/case for each fracture type were calculated and compared using Kruskal-Wallis tests. The mean total RVU for each fracture type was as follows: (1) Uni-malleolar: 9.99, (2) Bi-malleolar = 11.71 and 3) Tri-malleolar = 12.87 (p < .001). A statistically significant difference was noted in mean operative time (uni-malleolar = 63.2 vs bi-malleolar = 78.6 vs tri-malleolar = 95.5; p < .001) between the 3 groups. Reimbursement rates ($/min) decreased significantly as fracture complexity increased (uni-malleolar = $7.21/min vs bi-malleolar = $6.75/min vs tri-malleolar = $6.10; p < .001). The average reimbursement/case was $358, $420, and $462 for uni-malleolar, bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar fractures respectively. Foot & ankle surgeons are reimbursed at a higher rate ($/min) for treating a simple uni-malleolar fracture as compared to bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar fractures, despite the higher complexity and longer operative times seen in the latter. The study highlights the need of a change in the RVUs for bi-malleolar and tri-malleolar ankle fractures to ensure that surgeons are adequately reimbursed per unit time for treating a more complex fracture case.

An Analysis of Procedural Medicare Reimbursement Rates in Hand Surgery: 2000 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Medicare reimbursement trends across multiple surgical subspecialties have been analyzed; however, little has been reported regarding the long-term trends in reimbursement of hand surgery procedures. The aim of this study is to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement for commonly performed hand surgeries.

METHODS

Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File, we determined the 20 hand surgery procedure codes most commonly billed to Medicare in 2016. Reimbursement rates were collected and analyzed for each code from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool for years 2000 to 2019. We compared the change in reimbursement rate for each procedure to the rate of inflation in US dollars, using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the same time period.

RESULTS

The reimbursement rate for each procedure increased on average by 13.9% during the study period while the United States CPI increased significantly more by 46.7% (P < .0001). When all reimbursement data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 dollars, the average reimbursement for all included procedures in this study decreased by 22.6% from 2000 to 2019. The average adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased by 21.92% from 2000 to 2009 and decreased by 0.86% on average from 2009 to 2019 (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

When adjusted for inflation, Medicare reimbursement for hand surgery has steadily decreased over the past 20 years. It will be important to consider the implications of these trends when evaluating healthcare policies and the impact this has on access to hand surgery.

Are Trends in Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty Sustainable? Declining Inflation-Adjusted Medicare Reimbursement for Hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

While the burden of revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) procedures increases within the United States, it is unclear whether health care resource allocation for these complex cases has kept pace. This study examined the trends in hospital-level reimbursements for revision TJA hospitalizations.

METHODS

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient utilization and payment public use files from 2014 to 2019 were queried for diagnostic-related groups (DRGs) for revision TJA: DRG 467 (revision of hip or knee arthroplasty with complication or comorbidity [CC]) and DRG 468 (revision of hip or knee arthroplasty without CC or major CC). From 2014 to 2019, 170,808 revision TJA hospitalizations were billed to Medicare, and revision TJA procedures increased by 3,121 (10.7%). After adjusting to 2019 US dollars with the consumer price index, a multiple linear mixed-model regression analysis was performed. Analysis of covariance compared regressions from 2014 to 2019 for mean-adjusted Medicare payment and mean- adjusted charge were submitted for these DRGs.

RESULTS

Mean-adjusted average Medicare payment for DRG 467 decreased by $804.37 (-3.5%) from 2014 to 2019, whereas, that for DRG 468 decreased by $647.33 (-3.6%). The average inflation-adjusted Medicare payment for DRG 467 decreased at a greater rate during the study period, compared to that for DRG 468 (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The decline in reimbursement for DRGs 467 and 468 reveals decreasing incentives for revision TJA hospitalizations. Further research should assess the efficacy of current Medicare payment algorithms and identify modifications which may provide for fair hospital level reimbursements.

Comparison of value per operative time between anterior lumbar interbody fusion and lumbar disc arthroplasty: A propensity score-matched analysis

Context

Despite the growing evidence demonstrating its effectiveness, lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) rates have not increased significantly in recent years. A likely contributing factor is uncertainties related to reimbursement and insurers' denial of coverage due to fear of late complications, reoperations, and unknown secondary costs. However, no prior study has compared the physician reimbursement rates of lumbar fusion and LDA.

Aim

The aim of this study was to compare the relative value units (RVUs) per min as well as 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity rates between anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and LDA.

Settings and Design

This was a retrospective cohort study.

Subjects and Methods

The current study utilizes data obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients who underwent ALIF or LDA between 2011 and 2019 were included in the study.

Statistical Analysis Used

Propensity score matching analysis was performed according to demographic characteristics and comorbidities. Matched groups were compared through Fisher's exact test and independent t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.

Results

Five hundred and two patients who underwent ALIF were matched with 591 patients who underwent LDA. Mean RVUs per min was significantly higher for ALIF compared to LDA. ALIF was associated with a significantly higher 30-day morbidity rate compared to LDA, while readmission and reoperation rates were statistically similar. ALIF was also associated with higher frequencies of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and blood transfusions.

Conclusions

ALIF is associated with significantly higher RVUs per min compared to LDA. ALIF is also associated with higher rates of 30-day morbidity, DVT, and blood transfusions, while readmission and reoperation rates were statistically similar.

A Retrospective Review of Reimbursement in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Disparity Between Case Complexity and RVU Compensation

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasties (THA) are time-consuming, expensive, and technically challenging. Today's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and relative value units (RVU) may in fact disincentivize surgeons to perform revision THAs. Our study reviewed labor and time investments for each component-specific revision THA and analyzed the gap between procedural value billed and final reimbursement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 165 primary and revision THAs were validated using operative notes and billing records. We stratified revision THAs by standard CPT coding (with modifiers) as single acetabular component, single femoral component, femoral head plus polyethylene liner (head/liner) exchange, all-components, and spacer placement for infection. Operative time, RVUs, total charges, deductions, and final reimbursement data was collected. Mann-Whitney U tests studied final reimbursement per minute vs per RVU in revision and primary THAs.

RESULTS

Our cohort consisted of 27 primary THAs, 26 acetabular component revisions, 32 head/liner exchanges, 26 femoral component revisions, 27 all-component revisions, and 27 spacer placements. Compared to primary THAs, every revision subgroup except for head/liner exchanges were found to reimburse less per minute and all revision subgroups reimbursed less per RVU (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Physicians face less reimbursement per minute and per RVU for revision THAs. With cuts in reimbursement set forth by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and insurers, revisions may be financially unfavorable. This ultimately will lead to an impending access to care problem in the future. Our study supports the need to re-examine the RVU allocation amongst revision THAs and evaluate changes to the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding system.

A Retrospective Review of Relative Value Units in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Dichotomy Between Surgical Complexity and Reimbursement

BACKGROUND

Revision total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are costly, time-intensive, and technically demanding procedures. There are concerns regarding the valuation of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and the assigned relative value units (RVU) as a potential disincentive to perform revision TKAs. This study evaluated the labor and time investment for each component-specific revision and assessed the disparities between procedural value billed and reimbursement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 154 primary and revision TKA cases were thoroughly vetted using operative notes and internal billing data. Revision TKAs were stratified by single femoral component, single tibial component, polyethylene liner only, all-component, and spacer placement for prosthetic infection. Operative time, RVUs billed, total charges, deductions, and reimbursements were recorded. Mann-Whitney U tests compared final reimbursement per minute and per RVU between revision and primary TKAs.

RESULTS

There were 28 primary TKAs, 11 femoral component revisions, 25 tibial component revisions, 25 liner exchanges, 37 all-component revisions, and 28 spacer placements. Revisions involving the tibial component, all-components, and placement of spacers were reimbursed less dollars per minute than primary TKAs (P < .05). Controlling for RVUs, liner exchanges and all-component revisions had fewer dollars per RVU than primary TKAs (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

As revision complexity increases, physicians face less reimbursement per minute and per RVU. With reductions set by CMS and private insurers, revisions may be financially unfavorable and lead to restrictions and access to care problems. Our data supports the need for reevaluating RVU allocation amongst revision procedures with potential updates to the CPT coding system.

Does seasonal variation in orthopaedic trauma volume correlate with adverse hospital events and burnout?

INTRODUCTION

Assessing workload and mitigating burnout risk should be a constant goal within training programs. By using work relative value unit (wRVU) data in a non-elective orthopaedic trauma practice, we investigated seasonal variation in workload on an orthopaedic trauma service at a level I trauma centre. We also investigated whether there was a correlation in seasonal preventable adverse patient safety events (PSEs) and resident Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on wRVUs were collected over an 8-year period for a single orthopaedic trauma surgeon with a non-elective practice. Monthly wRVU totals were tabulated over this 8-year period and compared with total hospital orthopaedic surgical trauma volume. The total number of wRVUs and surgical cases analysed were 80,955 and 9,928 respectively. A total of 1,560 PSEs and four years of resident ESS scores were analysed. Data on seasonal variations was evaluated for significance utilizing the Kruskal-Wallis test. WRVUs were then compared to total case volume, PSEs, and resident ESS scores using Spearman's correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

We found that wRVUs significantly differed by month (P-value < 0.001) and season (P-value < 0.001) with the highest volume occurring in the summer months. Seasonal variation in wRVUs demonstrated a positive linear correlation with total surgical volume (P-value <0.001) and resident reported ESS scores (P-value = 0.001). PSEs were highest in the summer (P = 0.026), but were not correlated with our findings of seasonal variations in orthopaedic volume (P-value = 0.741).

CONCLUSION

WRVUs of our single surgeon's orthopaedic trauma practice had a seasonal variation with significantly higher volume during the summer. These findings were representative of seasonal variations in total hospital orthopaedic trauma volume and also demonstrated correlation with objective resident sleepiness scores. PSEs were more frequent in the summer but not correlated with seasonal variation in volume. Burnout poses a risk to patient safety and has been shown to be correlated with increased work volume. These topics are important and applicable to various specialties involved in the care of patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries.

Factors associated with RVU generation in common sports medicine procedures

INTRODUCTION

Relative value units (RVUs) are integral to the U.S. physician compensation system used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The use of 'work RVUs' (herein, wRVUs) is intended to reimburse physicians according to the amount of expertise and effort needed to safely and effectively perform a procedure. Our purpose was to determine: 1) the number of wRVUs/hour generated by common sports medicine surgical procedures; and 2) how patient characteristics, surgical approach, and practice setting are associated with the number of wRVUs/hour. This analysis was performed to infer whether wRVUs are assigned appropriately according to the factors on which they are purported to be based.

METHODS

We queried the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for common sports medicine surgical procedures performed in 2018. Data from 19,877 patients (8,258 women) with a mean age of 48 years (range, 18-90) who underwent a surgical sports medicine procedure were analyzed. Work RVUs and operative time were used to calculate work RVUs/hour for each surgical procedure. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess correlations between patient characteristics and wRVUs/hour.

RESULTS

Knee chondroplasty generated the most mean (± standard deviation) wRVUs/hour at 22 ± 0.5, whereas 'open tenodesis of biceps tendon, long head' generated the least at 9.6 ± 0.25 wRVUs/hour. Factors associated with a greater mean number of wRVUs/hour were younger patient age, female sex, arthroscopic approach, and outpatient setting. Arthroscopic procedures also generated more wRVUs/hour than the same procedures performed through an open approach. wRVUs were not correlated with case complexity or surgical time.

CONCLUSION

wRVUs/hour in surgical sports medicine procedures vary widely depending on the procedure type, patient characteristics, surgical approach, and practice setting.

Variation in Estimated Surgical Procedure Times Across Patient Characteristics and Surgeon Specialty

Importance

The time involved in performing a procedure is a key factor in determining physician payments by Medicare. However, there are long-standing concerns regarding the accuracy of the time estimates generated by the American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee surveys that are used in the valuation process, and there have been calls to use other data sources to estimate procedure times.

Objective

To compare estimated procedure times that come from claims with the times used in Medicare's valuation process.

Design and Setting

Building off prior work using Medicare fee-for-service claims, procedure times were estimated from linked anesthesia claims data for 1349 different Current Procedure Terminology codes that are typically performed with anesthesia. All procedures in the nation performed in 2018 for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries were included in the analysis. These estimated times were compared with the times used in the valuation process. Analysis took place from February to November 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Estimated procedure times using anesthesia claims were compared with the procedure time used in valuation by calculating an estimated-to-valuation procedure time ratio for each code. The valuation procedure time is publicly reported by Medicare. The mean and median ratio are presented over all procedures and for select high-volume codes as well as by patient characteristics (age, sex, and risk score) and specialty of the physician performing the procedure.

Results

Across 4.9 million procedures in this analysis, the mean estimated procedure time was 27% lower than the time used in the valuation process. There were notable exceptions, for which the mean estimated procedure time equaled or exceeded the valuation time including total hip arthroplasty (5% longer) and total knee arthroplasty (equal duration). Within a given code, older patients and those with more illness had longer procedure times. There was substantial variation across specialties in the percent difference between mean estimated and valuation procedure times ranging from gastroenterology (36% shorter) and ophthalmology (35% shorter) to cardiac surgery (2% longer) and thoracic surgery (7% longer).

Conclusions and Relevance

Claims-based procedure times could be used to improve the accuracy of valuations for procedures.

Relative Value Units Underestimate Reimbursement for Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Relative value units (RVUs) have been fundamental to reimbursement calculations in payment models for arthroplasty surgeons. RVUs are based on various factors, including physician work, and have been higher for increased complexity, such as revision arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare RVUs and estimated reimbursement differences between primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to collect primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty cases in 2017. Data variables collected included age at the time of surgery, surgical time, and RVU for each shoulder arthroplasty.

RESULTS

A total of 4,948 shoulder arthroplasty patients (4,657 primary and 291 revision) were included in this study. The mean age was 69.1 years (9.6 SD) for primary shoulder arthroplasty and 67.8 years (10.4 SD) for revision shoulder arthroplasty, P = 0.02. RVU for primary shoulder arthroplasty was 22.1 (0 SD) compared with 26.4 (1.1 SD) for revision shoulder arthroplasty (P = 0.0001). Surgical time was significantly higher in revision versus primary cases, 131.5 minutes (89.0 SD) versus 109.3 minutes (42.5 SD) (P = 0.0001). RVUs per minute were near equivalent for primary and revision arthroplasty at 0.20 (0.1 SD) and 0.20 (01 SD), respectively. However, owing to the difference in surgical time and cases per day, this translates to an estimated reimbursement difference of $174,554.4 per year more for primary shoulder arthroplasty over revision cases.

CONCLUSION

The current RVU model does not adequately factor surgical time for revision shoulder arthroplasty and translates to a notable yearly reimbursement difference that favors primary shoulder arthroplasty.

Revision ACL reconstruction has higher incidence of 30-day hospital readmission, reoperation, and surgical complications relative to primary procedures

PURPOSE

Although there has been substantial improvement in ACL reconstructive surgery, graft failure remains a devastating complication for some patients. Revision procedures are inherently more complex and technically challenging. The purpose of this study is to determine the incidence of short-term complications after these procedures and to compare trends in operative length, relative valuation, and reimbursement after primary versus revision ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

Primary and revision arthroscopic ACL reconstruction cases were identified on the American College of Surgeons' NSQIP database using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2017. Demographics, patient variables, and surgical variables were compared between primary and revision groups using Chi-squared tests. Logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for revision ACL reconstruction. Various 30-day outcome measures were compared between the primary and revision ACL reconstruction groups. Various measures of valuation-including total relative value units (RVU) and reimbursement per minute-were calculated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 8292 patients-8135 primary and 157 revision procedures-were included in the final cohort. Higher ASA scores were associated with revision ACL reconstructions. Patients undergoing revision procedures were less likely to have an ASA score of 1 (p < 0.001) and more likely to have an ASA score of 2 (p = 0.004) or 3 (p = 0.020). Revision ACL reconstruction was associated with higher rates of poor 30-day outcome measures, including unplanned readmission (p = 0.029), reoperation (p = 0.012), return to the OR (p = 0.012), and surgical complications (p = 0.021). The total RVUs and reimbursement for revision procedures were significantly greater than those for primary procedures (p < 0.001). However, when accounting for operative time, the RVU/minute and reimbursement/minute were similar between the two groups (n.s.).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to primary ACL reconstruction, revision ACL procedures are associated with worse short-term outcomes-including unplanned readmission, reoperation, return to the OR, and surgical complications. A greater ASA score was independently predictive of revision ACL surgery. The current RVU system undervalues revision ACL procedures, considering the increased operative time and complexity of such procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Time Required for Planned and Unplanned Episodes of Care in Septic Two-Stage Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Septic revision total hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) arthroplasty requires more effort but is reimbursed less than primary procedures per minute of intraoperative time. This study quantified planned and unplanned work performed by the surgical team for septic 2-stage revision surgeries during the entire episode-of-care "reimbursement window" and compared that time to allowable reimbursement amounts.

METHODS

Between October 2010 and December 2020 all unilateral septic 2-stage rTHA and rTKA procedures performed by a single surgeon at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Time dedicated to planned work was calculated over each episode of care, from surgery scheduling to 90 days postoperatively. Impromptu patient inquiries and treatments after discharge, but within the episode of care, involving the surgeon/surgeon team constituted unplanned work. Planned and unplanned work minutes were summed and divided by the number of patients reviewed to obtain average minutes of work per patient.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight hips and 64 knees were included. For 2-stage rTHA and rTKA the average time per patient for planned care was 1728 and 1716 minutes and for unplanned care was 339 and 237 minutes. Compared to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' allowable reimbursement times, an additional 799 and 887 minutes of uncompensated time was required to care for 2-stage rTHA and rTKA patients.

CONCLUSION

Two-stage revision procedures are substantially more complex than primary procedures. Financially disincentivizing surgeons to care for these patients reduces access to care when high-quality care is most needed. These findings support increasing the allowable times for 2-stage septic revision cases.

Primary versus revision total shoulder arthroplasty: comparing relative value and reimbursement trends

Background

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment for multiple shoulder pathologies. The purpose of our study was to compare the relative value units (RVUs) per minute of surgical time for primary and revision TSA.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to identify patients that underwent primary TSA, one-component revision TSA, and two-component revision TSA between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017 using current procedure terminology codes. RVUs were divided by mean operative time for each procedure to determine the amount of revenue generated per minute. Rates were compared between the groups using a one-way analysis of variance with post-hoc Tukey test. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

Results

When dividing compensation by surgical time, we found that two-component revision generated more compensation per minute compared to primary TSA (0.284±0.114 vs. 0.239±0.278 RVU per minute or $10.25±$4.11 vs. $8.64±$10.05 per minute, respectively; p=0.001).

Conclusions

The relative value of revision TSA procedures is weighted to account for the increased technical challenges and time associated with these procedures. This study confirms that reimbursement is higher for revision TSA compared to primary TSA.

What is a better value for your time? Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty

Introduction

Compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), the motion preservation of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) provides an attractive alternative with similar short-term results. However, there is a paucity of the economics of performing CDA over ACDF.

Study Design:

This was retrospective study.

Objective:

The objective of this study is to evaluate relative-value-units (RVUs), operative time, and RVUs-per-minute between single-level ACDF and CDA. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity.

Methods:

Adults who underwent ACDF or CDA in 2011–2019 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database datasets. Multivariate quantile regression was utilized.

Results:

There were 26,595 patients (2024 CDA). ACDF patients were older, more likely to be female, discharged to inpatient rehabilitation, and have a history of obesity, smoking, diabetes, steroid use, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists-class ≥3. ACDF had greater median RVUs-per-case (41.2 vs. 24.1) and RVUs-per-minute (0.36 vs. 0.27), despite greater operative-time (109 min vs. 92 min) (P < 0.001). ACDF predicted a 16.9 unit increase in median RVUs per case (P < 0.001, confidence interval [CI]⁹⁵: 16.3–17.5), an 8.81 min increase in median operative time per case (P < 0.001, CI⁹⁵: 5.69–11.9), and 0.119 unit increase in median RVUs-per-minute (P < 0.001, CI⁹⁵: 0.108–0.130). ACDF was associated with greater unadjusted rates of readmission (3.2% vs. 1.4%) morbidity (2.3% vs. 1.1%) (P < 0.001), but similar rates of reoperation (1.3% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.080). After adjusting for significant patient-related and procedural factors, readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.695, P = 0.130, CI⁹⁵: 0.434–1.113) and morbidity (OR = 1.102, P = 0.688, CI⁹⁵: 0.685–1.773) was similar between ACDF and CDA.

Conclusions:

Median RVUs-per-minute increased by 0.119 points for ACDF over CDA, or $257.7/h for each additional-hour of surgery. Adjusted 30-day outcomes were similar between procedures. Reimbursement for CDA does not appear to be in line with ACDF and may be a barrier to widespread usage.

Procedures With Longer Intraoperative Times Undervalue Surgeon Work in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Large, Nationwide Database Study

BACKGROUND

Work relative value units (wRVUs) measure a surgeon's time and intensity required to perform the pre-service, intra-service, and post-service work of a surgical procedure and are commonly used to compare a physician's work between different procedures. Previous literature across multiple specialties report that longer, often revision, operations are undervalued when compared to primary procedures. Our study aims to analyze the differences in intra-operative time, and its corresponding wRVU/h between the Medicare benchmarks and real-world time-stamped data for total joint arthroplasty procedures.

METHODS

Thirteen primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty procedures were identified, and intra-operative times were collected using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases from 2014 to 2019. The Relative Value Scale Update Committee's (RUC) estimated median intra-operative times for each procedure was compared to the calculated median intra-operative times from National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, as were their corresponding wRVU/h. Procedures were additionally stratified by "long" (>110 minutes) and "short" (≤110 minutes) intra-operative times.

RESULTS

The RUC over-estimated intra-operative time by 35.24% on average and this overestimation was more profound in longer operations than shorter operations (47.75% vs 15.22%, P = .011). The RUC intensity per unit time values (wRVU/h) between "long" and "short" procedures were significantly different (P < .001) and showed the undervaluation of intensity for the longer procedures by an average of 3.47 wRVU/h.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides further evidence that physician work is undervalued in revision total hip and knee surgeries.

Development of a local model for measuring the work of surgeons

Objective: The Relative Value Unit (RVU) is the main method of calculating surgeons’ reimbursements and a tool for measuring the work of surgeons. Existing evidence shows that the work Relative Value Unit (wRVU) does not accurately represent surgeon’s work. Therefore, the current study attempted to develop a local model to measure surgeons’ work.

Material and Methods: This study was conducted in two main phases of determining the metrics and model development using quantitative and qualitative approaches from December 2019 to April 2021. Literature review, focused group discussions, and interviews were used to collect data. Con- tent analysis and Exploratory Data Analysis techniques were applied to analyze data.

Results: The findings demonstrated that patient’s conditions (age, severity of disease at referring time, and comorbidities), disease specifications (time, complexity, physical effort, and risk), and provider characteristic (surgeon’s willingness, imposed stress, and surgeon’s skill) were important by 17, 51, and 32%, respectively, in determining surgeons’ work.

Conclusion: Determining a fixed value for each procedure does not accurately estimate the amount of required surgeon’s work for any procedure. Many factors, such as the patient’s condition, surgeon’s characteristics, and disease specification affect surgeons’ work in the operation room. Proper measurement of the surgeon’s work is an important step towards establishing equity in payment in the health system.

Are Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons Adequately Compensated for Longer Procedures? An Analysis of Relative Value Units and Operative Times From the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

BACKGROUND

The physician work relative value unit (wRVU) scale is the primary determinant of compensation. Operative time, technical skill, effort, and surgical complexity contribute to wRVU allocation. The aim of this study was to identify the relationship between these factors and reimbursement for trauma procedures.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for orthopaedic trauma procedures from 2016 to 2018. Physician wRVU data were obtained from the 2020 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee schedule. The primary outcome measured was mean wRVU per minute of operative time (wRVU/min). Wilcoxon rank sum test and quantile regression were used to determine the association between wRVU, operative time, complication rate, upper or lower extremity procedure, and wRVU/min.

RESULTS

Sixty-three current procedural terminology codes or 107,171 cases were queried. Median wRVU/min was significantly lower for longest 50% of procedures (0.119 vs. 0.160, P < 0.001) and higher for the top 50% with regard to complication rate (0.161 vs. 0.124, P < 0.001). Upper extremity procedures were reimbursed less than lower extremity (0.110 vs. 0.145, P < 0.001). Quintile regression showed that adjusted for complication rate, median wRVU/min decreased by 0.0005 (95% confidence interval: 0.0007-0.0003, R1 = 0.27, P < 0.001) for every additional minute of operative time.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2020 wRVU scale does not allocate sufficient wRVUs to orthopaedic trauma procedures with longer mean operative time or to procedures performed on the upper extremity. There is a negative correlation between operative time and hourly reimbursement, equating to a decrease of $64.96/h per hour of operation.

Current Relative Value Unit Scale Does Not Appropriately Compensate for Longer Orthopedic Sports Surgeries

PURPOSE

To assess whether reimbursement for orthopaedic sports procedures adequately compensates for operative time and surgical complexity.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all orthopedic sports medicine procedures performed greater than 150 times from 2016 to 2018 with regard to operative time, preoperative risk factors, morbidity, and mortality data. Physician work relative value units (wRVU) data were obtained from the 2020 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) fee schedule. The primary outcome was wRVU per minute operative time (wRVU/min). Linear regressions were used to assess wRVU, operative time, and wRVU/min.

RESULTS

A total of 42 CPT codes, including 84,966 cases, were stratified into the top and bottom 50%, according to mean operative time, complications, mortality, reoperations, and readmissions. Mean wRVU/min was significantly lower for longer procedures (.153 vs .187; P = .02), and comparable with regard to ASA score, complications, mortality, readmissions, and reoperations. Arthroscopy reimbursed more (.187 vs .148 wRVU/min; P = .008), with lower complications (1.5 vs 2.6%; P = .115) and operative time (56.1 vs 82.8 min; P = .001) compared to open. Multivariate linear regression revealed that after adjusting for complication rate, there was a decrease of .054 wRVU/h (P = .026) and $116.90/hour less for every additional hour of operative time.

CONCLUSION

The current 2020 RVU scale does not fairly compensate sports procedures with longer operative times. When examining the hourly reimbursement rates for the most commonly performed sports procedures, there is a significant trend toward lower reimbursement for longer procedures even after accounting for complication rates. Furthermore, procedures of the knee reimbursed at higher rates relative to the general pool of sports procedures and open procedures are compensated at a lower rate compared to arthroscopic procedures.

The 2021 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Fee Schedule's Impact on Adult Reconstruction Surgeon Productivity and Reimbursement

BACKGROUND

On December 20, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized its proposed rule: CMS-1734-P. This 2021 Final Rule significantly changed Medicare total joint arthroplasty (TJA) reimbursement. The precise impact on surgeon productivity and reimbursement is unknown. In the present study, we sought to model the potential impact of these changes for multiple unique practice configurations.

METHODS

A mathematical model was applied to CMS data to determine the impact of CMS-1734-F on multiple, theoretical TJA practice configurations. Variables tested were the annual percentage of revision vs primary arthroplasty cases performed and the annual percentage of operative vs office-based productivity. The model defined baseline annual surgeon productivity as the 2018 Medical Group Management Association hip and knee arthroplasty surgeon median productivity of 10,568 work relative value units (wRVUs).

RESULTS

All modeled simulations demonstrated a year-to-year increase in wRVUs independent of practice configuration. However, simulations that demonstrated less than a 3.35% increase in wRVUs from year-to-year saw a decrease in reimbursement. Those simulations with higher wRVU increases tended to have a higher percentage of revision vs primary arthroplasty cases and/or had annual productivity that was derived to a greater extent from office encounters than surgical cases.

CONCLUSION

The impact of CMS-1734-F will vary based on 3 factors: (1) the relative contribution of a surgeon's operative TJA practice compared with their office-based practice to their annual wRVUs; (2) the relative percentage of revision TJAs vs the percentage of primary TJAs performed; and (3) the relative percentage of primary TJA compared to non-arthroplasty surgeries as a component of overall operative practice. The decreased reimbursement will be disproportionately felt by arthroplasty surgeons who perform relatively fewer revision TJA procedures and whose office-based productivity makes up a smaller overall percentage of their annual workload.

Comparing Relative Value Units among Shoulder Arthroplasty, Hemiarthroplasty, and ORIF for Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly: Which is Most Worth Your Time?

Background

Relative value units (RVUs) are assigned to Current Procedural Technology (CPT) codes and give relative economic values to the services physicians provide. This study compared the RVU reimbursements for the surgical options of proximal humerus fractures in the elderly, which include arthroplasty (reverse [RSA] and total [TSA]), hemiarthroplasty (HA), and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF).

Methods

Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, a total of 1,437 patients of at least 65 years of age with proximal humerus fractures between 2008 and 2016 were identified. Of those, 259 underwent RSA/TSA (CPT code 23472), 418 underwent HA (CPT codes 23470 and 23616), and 760 underwent ORIF (CPT code 23615). Univariate analysis compared RVU per minute, reimbursement rate, and the average annual revenue across cohorts based on respective operative times.

Results

RSA/TSA generated a mean RVU per minute of 0.197 (SD 0.078; 95%CI [0.188, 0.207]), which was significantly greater than the mean RVU per minute for 23470 HA (0.156; SD 0.057; 95%CI [0.148, 0.163]), 23616 HA (0.166; SD 0.065; 95%CI [0.005, 0.156]), and ORIF (0.135; SD 0.048; 95%CI [0.132, 0.138]; P<0.001). This converted to respective reimbursement rates of $6.97/min (SD 2.78; 95%CI [6.63, 7.31]), $5.48/min (SD 2.05; 95%CI [5.22, 5.74]), $5.83/min (SD 2.28; 95%CI [5.49, 6.16]) and $4.74/min (SD 1.69; 95%CI [4.62, 4.87]). After extrapolation, respective average annual revenues were $580,386, $456,633, $475,077, and $395,608.

Conclusion

RSA/TSA provides significantly greater reimbursement rates compared to HA and ORIF. Orthopaedic surgeons can use this information to optimize daily procedural cost-effectiveness in their practices.

Is Conversion TKA a Primary or Revision? Clinical Course and Complication Risks Approximating Revision TKA Rather Than Primary TKA

BACKGROUND

Conversion total knee arthroplasty (convTKA) is associated with increased resource utilization and costs compared with primary TKA. The purpose of this study is to compare 1) surgical time, 2) hospitalization length (LOS), 3) complications, 4) infection, and 5) readmissions in patients undergoing convTKA to both primary TKA and revision TKA patients.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database was queried from 2008 to 2018. Patients undergoing convTKA (n = 1,665, 0.5%) were defined by selecting Current Procedural Terminology codes 27,447 and 20,680. We compared the outcomes of interest to patients undergoing primary TKA (n = 348,624) and to patients undergoing aseptic revision TKA (n = 8213). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the relative risk of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Compared with patients undergoing primary TKA, convTKA patients were younger (P < .001), had lower body mass index (P < .001), and were less likely to be American Society of Anesthesiologist class III/IV (P < .001). These patients had significantly longer operative times (122.6 vs 90.3 min, P < .001), increased LOS (P < .001), increased risks for any complication (OR 1.94), surgical site infection (OR 1.84), reoperation (OR 2.18), and readmissions (OR 1.60) after controlling for confounders. Compared with aseptic TKA revisions, operative times were shorter (122.6 vs 148.2 min, P < .001), but LOS (2.91 vs 2.95 days, P = .698) was similar. Furthermore, relative risk for any complication (P = .350), surgical site infection (P = .964), reoperation (P = .296), and readmissions (P = .844) did not differ.

CONCLUSION

Conversion TKA procedures share more similarities with revision TKA rather than primary TKA procedures. Without a distinct procedural and diagnosis-related group, there are financial disincentives to care for these complex patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Temporal Trends in Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty from 2008 to 2018: Gaps and Opportunities

BACKGROUND

An overall assessment of how patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities are improving or worsening can allow better understanding of the value of revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities trends and episode-of-care outcome trends from 2008 to 2018 in patients undergoing revision TJA.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to identify patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and episode-of-care outcomes in patients undergoing revision TJA from 2008 to 2018 (n = 45,706). Pairwise t tests and pairwise chi-square tests were performed on consecutive years with Bonferroni correction. Trends were assessed using the 2-tailed Mann-Kendall test of the temporal trend.

RESULTS

Among patients undergoing revision TJA, there was no clinically important difference, from 2008 to 2018, in age, body mass index (BMI), percentages with >40 kg/m2 BMI, diabetes (18.8% to 19%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (4.1% to 5.4%), congestive heart failure within 30 days (0% to 1%), or acute renal failure (0% to 0.2%). However, modifiable comorbidities including smoking status (14.7% to 12.0%; p = 0.01), hypertension (66% to 26.0%; p = 0.02), anemia (34.5% to 26.3%; p < 0.001), malnutrition (10.4% to 9.3%; p = 0.004), and overall morbidity or mortality probability have improved, with a decrease in the hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission and a significant increase in home discharge (p < 0.001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Time-difference analysis demonstrated that the overall health status of patients undergoing revision TJA improved from 2008 to 2018. However, formal time-trend analysis demonstrated improvements to a lesser degree. The multidisciplinary effort to improve value-based metrics including patient comorbidity optimization and episode-of-care outcomes for primary TJA has been shown to potentially have an impact on revision TJA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluation of the Relationship Between Aspects of Medical Complexity and Work Relative Value Units (wRVUs) for Foot and Ankle Surgical Procedures

Work relative value units (wRVUs) have been assigned to current procedural terminology codes in an effort to help establish physician compensation. However, the ability of these to accurately and efficiently capture the time, technical, and perioperative managerial aspects required of various procedures has recently been called into question for several surgical subspecialties. Therefore, the objective of this investigation was to evaluate various measures of medical complexity against wRVUs for foot and ankle surgical procedures. The 2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was utilized to identify and extract data related to the perioperative medical complexity of 16 foot and ankle surgical current procedural terminology codes. We observed a "weak" positive relationship between wRVUs and operation time as defined by a correlation coefficient of 0.234 (p < .001). Other variables associated with medical complexity in the perioperative period were found to significantly vary between wRVUs categories, but these differences were neither consistently nor directly associated with assigned relative values. We conclude that wRVUs might not always represent an efficient means for determining compensation for foot and ankle surgical procedures.

Aseptic Revision Total Knee Can Be Performed as Part of a Short-Stay Arthroplasty Program: An Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is becoming an increasingly common procedure to alleviate knee pain often associated with osteoarthritis. As the number of revision TKAs performed continues to increase, there remains a debate regarding the efficacy of discharging patients earlier than the conventional 3 to 4 days in the postoperative period. A variety of studies have begun to show that interchangably discharge in the primary TKA setting has an economical benefit while causing either a reduction or no difference in patient outcomes. This study aims to determine the effect of rapid discharge at 0- to 2-day postoperative stay compared to the conventional 3- to 4-day postoperative stay on postdischarge complications in patients undergoing revision TKA. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data collected through the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program Database. All patients who underwent aseptic revision TKA between 2005 and 2016 were identified and stratified into groups based on length of stay: 0 to 2 days versus 3 to 4 days. Patients suffering from predischarge complications were excluded to minimize bias. Single-component versus both-component revisions were analyzed. The incidence of adverse events following discharge was evaluated with univariate and logistic multivariate analyses where appropriate. Patients who underwent single-component revisions and were discharged rapidly were less likely to develop minor complications (p = 0.001; odds ratio [OR]: 0.355; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.188-0.671) and septic complications (p = 0.016; OR: 0.011; 95% CI: 0-0.430) within the 30-day postoperative period. No differences were observed in discharge cohorts among patients undergoing both-component revisions. We found that rapid discharge following aseptic revision TKA is not associated with increased risks for postoperative complications. Rapid discharge may have benefits for healthy patients undergoing single-component revisions. Careful selection of revision TKA patients for rapid discharge may help to lower the increasing costs of the procedure and improve patient outcomes. Further study is required to refine the selection criteria to identify patients eligible for short stay or outpatient revision TKA.

Medicare Physician Fee Reimbursement for Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Has Not Kept Up with Inflation from 2002 to 2019

BACKGROUND

As orthopaedic physician fees continue to come under scrutiny by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), there is a continued need to evaluate trends in reimbursement rates across contemporary time intervals. Although substantially lower work relative value units (RVUs) have been previously demonstrated for septic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared with aseptic revisions, to our knowledge, there has been no corresponding analysis comparing total physician fees. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to analyze temporal trends in Medicare physician fees for septic and aseptic revision TKAs.

METHODS

Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes related to septic 1-stage and 2-stage revision TKAs and aseptic revision TKAs were categorized. From 2002 to 2019, the facility rates of physician fees associated with each CPT code were obtained from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool. Monetary data from Medicare Administrative Contractors at 85 locations were used to calculate nationally representative means. All total physician fee values were adjusted for inflation and were translated to 2019 U.S. dollars using Consumer Price Index data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Cumulative annual percentage changes and compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) were computed utilizing adjusted physician fee data.

RESULTS

After adjusting for inflation, the total mean Medicare reimbursement (and standard deviation) for aseptic revision TKA decreased 24.83% ± 3.65% for 2-component revision and 24.21% ± 3.68% for 1-component revision. The mean septic revision TKA total Medicare reimbursement declined 23.29% ± 3.73% for explantation and 33.47% ± 3.24% for reimplantation. Both the dollar amount (p < 0.0001) and the percentage (p < 0.0001) of the total Medicare reimbursement decline for septic revision TKA were significantly greater than the decline for aseptic revision TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

Septic revision TKAs have been devalued at a rate greater than their aseptic counterparts over the past 2 decades. Coupled with our findings, the increased resource utilization of septic revision TKAs may result in financial barriers for physicians and subsequently may reduce access to care for patients with periprosthetic joint infections.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The devaluation of revision TKAs may result in reduced patient access to infection management at facilities unable to bear the financial burden of these procedures.

Free Falling: Declining Inflation-Adjusted Payment for Arthroplasty Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, there have been ongoing concerns over declining surgeon compensation for lower extremity arthroplasty. We aimed to determine changes in surgeon payment, patient charges, and overall reimbursement rates for patients undergoing unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA) and both primary and revision total knee (TKA) and hip (THA) arthroplasty.

METHODS

Using Medicare data from 2012 to 2017, we determined inflation-adjusted changes in annual surgeon payment (professional fee), patient charges, and reimbursement rate (payment-to-charge ratio) for UKA and primary/revision TKA and THA. Both nonweighted and weighted (by procedure frequency/volume) means were calculated.

RESULTS

Inflation-adjusted surgeon payment decreased for all procedures analyzed, with primary TKA (-17%) and THA (-11%) falling the most. Payment for UKA increased the most (+30%). There was a small increase in charges for THA revision (+2.2%, +2.1%, and +3.2% for acetabulum only, femur only, and both components, respectively). Charges for primary TKA (-3.7%) and THA (-1.5%) decreased slightly. The reimbursement rate for all procedures fell with UKA (-15%), TKA (-14%), and THA (-10%) falling the most. After weighting by procedure frequency/volume and combining all surgeries, average charges fell slightly (-0.7%), whereas surgeon payment (-13%) and reimbursement rate (-12%) fell more sharply.

CONCLUSION

Although patient charges have grown in pace with the inflationary rate for primary and revision TKA and THA, surgeon payment and reimbursement rates have fallen sharply. The orthopedic community needs to be aware of these financial trends to communicate to payers and health care policy makers the importance of protecting a sustainable payment infrastructure.

Reassessment of Relative Value in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery: Do Payment and Relative Value Units Reflect Reality?

BACKGROUD

Many U.S. health care institutions have adopted compensation models based on work relative value units (wRVUs) to standardize payments and incentivize providers. A major determinant of payment and wRVU assignments is operative time. We sought to determine whether differences in estimated operative times between the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) contribute to payment and wRVU misvaluation for the most common shoulder/elbow procedures.

METHODS

We collected data on wRVUs, payments, and operative times from CMS for 29 types of isolated arthroscopic and open shoulder/elbow procedures. Using regression analysis, we compared relationships between these variables, in addition to median operative times reported by NSQIP (2013-2016). We then determined the relative valuation of each procedure based on operative time.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine percent of CMS operative time were longer than NSQIP time (R2 = 0.58), including, but not limited to, shoulder arthroplasty and arthroscopic shoulder surgery. The correlation between payments and operative times was stronger between CMS data (R2 = 0.61) than NSQIP data (R2 = 0.43). Similarly, the correlation between wRVUs and operative times was stronger when using CMS data (R2 = 0.87) than NSQIP data (R2 = 0.69). Nearly all arthroscopic shoulder procedures (aside from synovectomy, debridement, and decompression) were highly valued according to both datasets. Per NSQIP, compensation for revision total shoulder arthroplasty ($10.14/min; 0.26 wRVU/min) was higher than that for primary cases ($9.85, 0.23 wRVU/min) and nearly twice the CMS rate for revision cases ($5.84/min; 0.13 wRVU/min).

CONCLUSIONS

CMS may overestimate operative times compared to actual operative times as recorded by NSQIP. Shorter operative times may render certain procedures more highly valued than others. Case examples show that this can potentially affect patient care and incentivize higher compensating procedures per operative time when less-involved, shorter operations have similar patient-reported outcomes.

Cost Analysis of Medicare Patients with Varying Complexities Who Underwent Total Knee Arthroplasty

The effort to reduce overall healthcare costs may affect more complex patients, as their pre- and postoperative care can be substantially involved. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use a large nationwide insurance database to compare (1) costs, (2) reimbursements, and (3) net losses of 90-day episodes of care (EOC) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients according to Elixhauser's Comorbidity Index (ECI) scores. All TKAs performed between 2005 and 2014 in the Medicare Standard Analytic Files were extracted from the database and stratified based on ECI scores, ranging from 1 to 5. ECI 1 patients served as the control cohort, while ECI 2, 3, 4, and 5 patients were considered study cohorts. Each study cohort and control cohort were matched based on age and sex, resulting in a total of 715,398 patients included for analysis. Total EOC costs, reimbursements, and total net losses (defined as total EOC costs minus total EOC reimbursements) were compared between the cohorts. Overall, total EOC costs increased with ECI. For example, compared with the matched ECI 1 cohorts, the total EOC costs for ECI 5 patients ($56,589.19 vs. $51,747.54) were significantly greater (p < 0.01). Although reimbursements increased with increasing ECI, so did net losses. The net losses for ECI 5 patients were greater than that for ECI 1 patients ($42,309.39 vs. $40,007.82). The bundled payments for care improvement (BPCI) and comprehensive care for joint replacement (CJR) are alternative payment models that might de-incentivize treatment of more complex patients. Our study found that despite increasing reimbursements, overall costs, and therefore net losses, were greater for more complex patients with higher ECI scores.

Trends in reimbursement for primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Relative value units (RVUs) are an essential component of reimbursement calculations from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. RVUs are calculated based on physician work, practice expense, and professional liability insurance. Procedures that are more complex, such as revision arthroplasty, require greater levels of physician work and should therefore be assigned a greater RVU. The purpose of this study is to compare RVUs assigned for primary and revision total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to collect all primary and revision total elbow arthroplasties performed between January 2015 and December 2017. Variables collected included age at time of surgery, RVUs assigned for the procedure, and operative time.

RESULTS

A total of 359 cases (282 primary TEA, 77 revision TEA) were included in this study. Mean RVUs for primary TEA was 21.4 (2.0 standard deviation [SD]) vs. 24.4 (1.7 SD) for revision arthroplasty (P < .001). Mean operative time for primary TEA was 137.9 minutes (24.4 SD) vs. 185.5 minutes (99.7 SD) for revision TEA (P < .001). The RVU per minute for primary TEA was 0.16 and revision TEA was 0.13 (P < .001). This amounts to a yearly reimbursement difference of $71,024 in favor of primary TEA over revision TEA.

CONCLUSION

The current reimbursement model does not adequately account for increased operative time, technical demand, and pre- and postoperative care associated with revision elbow arthroplasty compared with primary TEA. This leads to a financial advantage on performing primary TEA.

Reimbursement for Hip Fractures: The Impact of Varied Current Procedural Terminology Coding Using Relative Value Units

BACKGROUND

Many orthopedic practices routinely code hip fracture hemiarthroplasty as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 27125 even though 27236 is the correct CPT code. Our objective is to determine the financial impact this simple mistake has on surgeon reimbursement.

METHODS

Our data comprised cases assigned International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code S72.001A through S72.035A and CPT code 27125 or 27236 within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2016-2017 database. Relative value units (RVUs) per CPT code and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported that RVU conversion factor of $36.0896 per 1 RVU was used to calculate reimbursement per case. The dollar difference and percent difference per case was then calculated between cases assigned CPT code 27125 and those assigned 27236.

RESULTS

Our total sample consisted of 12,287 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program cases. Of those, 4185 (34%) were cases of a hip fracture treated with hemiarthroplasty that were incorrectly coded as CPT code 27125. That error in coding results in a decrease in reimbursement of $35.01 per case, a 5.51% difference.

CONCLUSION

Since the current healthcare reimbursement model relies solely on CPT codes to determine RVUs, it is imperative that orthopedic surgeons understand the financial impact of incorrect coding. Although correct coding of hemiarthroplasty procedures for hip fractures is an easy task to fix in the future, we hope that through this study a greater emphasis is placed on coding in orthopedic surgery.