Are We at the Bottom? BPCI Programs Now Disincentivize Providers Who Maintain Quality Despite Caring for Increasingly Complex Patients

Analysis of Costs Associated With Increased Length of Stay After Total Joint Arthroplasty at a Single Private Practice

INTRODUCTION

As the demand for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) increases, so does the financial burden of these services. Despite efforts to optimize spending and bundled care payments, THA and TKA costs still need to be assessed. Our study explores the relationship between perioperative costs and length of stay (LOS) for THA and TKA.

METHODS

A total of 614 patients undergoing THA or TKA at a single private practice with LOS from zero to 3 days were identified. All patients were insured by private or Medicare Advantage insurance from a single provider. Primary outcomes included total costs and their relationship with LOS, classified into surgeon reimbursement, facility costs, and anesthesia costs. Secondary outcomes included readmission rates and discharge disposition. Analyses involved Student t-test, analysis of variance, and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Longer LOS was associated with increased total, facility, and anesthesia costs. Costs for THA patients were stable except for reduced surgeon reimbursement with longer LOS. Patients undergoing TKA experienced an increase in facility costs with longer LOS. Total facility and anesthesia costs increased with LOS for Medicare Advantage patients, but surgeon reimbursement remained stable. Privately insured patients experienced higher total and facility costs but stable surgeon reimbursement and anesthesia costs regardless of LOS.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows an increase in total cost with longer LOS, especially pronounced in privately insured patients. A notable reduction was observed in the surgeon reimbursement for Medicare Advantage patients with extended LOS. These findings underscore the need for efficient surgical practices and postoperative care strategies to optimize hospital stays and control costs.

A Cautionary Tale: Malaligned Incentives in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Payment Model Reforms Threaten Promising Innovation and Access to Care

Over the past several years, there have been notable changes and controversies involving Medicare reimbursement for total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We have seen the development and implementation of experimental bundled payment model pilot programs goals of improving quality and decreasing overall costs of care during the last decade. Many orthopaedic surgeons have embraced these programs and have demonstrated the ability to succeed in these new models by implementing strategies, such as preservice optimization, to shift care away from inpatient or postdischarge settings and reduce postoperative complications. However, these achievements have been met with continual reductions in surgeon reimbursement rates, lower bundle payment target pricings, modest increases in hospital reimbursement rates, and inappropriate valuations of THA and TKA Common Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. These challenges have led to an organized advocacy movement and spurred research involving the methods by which improvements have been made throughout the entire episode of arthroplasty care. Collectively, these efforts have recently led to a novel application of CPT codes recognized by payers to potentially capture presurgical optimization work. In this paper, we present an overview of contemporary payment models, summarize notable events involved in the review of THA and TKA CPT codes, review recent changes to THA and TKA reimbursement, and discuss future challenges faced by arthroplasty surgeons that threaten access to high-quality THA and TKA care.

Implementation of a Private Payer Bundled Payment Model While Maintaining High-Value Lumbar Spinal Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single-institution cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the implementation of a commercial bundled payment model in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

BPCI-A caused significant losses for many physician practices, prompting private payers to establish their own bundled payment models. The feasibility of these private bundles has yet to be evaluated in spine fusion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing lumbar fusion from October to December 2018 in BPCI-A before our institution's departure were included for BPCI-A analysis. Private bundle data was collected from 2018 to 2020. Analysis of the transition was conducted among Medicare-aged beneficiaries. Private bundles were grouped by calendar year (Y1, Y2, Y3). Stepwise multivariate linear regression was performed to measure independent predictors of net deficit.

RESULTS

The net surplus was the lowest in Y1 ($2,395, P =0.03) but did not differ between our final year in BPCI-A and subsequent years in private bundles (all, P >0.05). AIR and SNF patient discharges decreased significantly in all private bundle years compared with BPCI. Readmissions fell from 10.7% (N=37) in BPCI-A to 4.4% (N=6) in Y2 and 4.5% (N=3) Y3 of private bundles ( P <0.001). Being in Y2 or Y3 was independently associated with a net surplus in comparison to the Y1 (β: $11,728, P =0.001; β: $11,643, P =0.002). Postoperatively, length of stay in days (β: $-2,982, P <0.001), any readmission (β: -$18,825, P =0.001), and discharge to AIR (β: $-61,256, P <0.001) or SNF (β: $-10,497, P =0.058) were all associated with a net deficit.

CONCLUSIONS

Nongovernmental bundled payment models can be successfully implemented in lumbar spinal fusion patients. Constant price adjustment is necessary so bundled payments remain financially beneficial to both parties and systems overcome early losses. Private insurers who have more competition than the government may be more willing to provide mutually beneficial situations where cost is reduced for payers and health systems.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Lower Revenue Surplus in Medicare Advantage Versus Private Commercial Insurance for Total Joint Arthroplasty: An Analysis of a Single Payor Source at One Institution

BACKGROUND

Since the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010, reductions in Medicare reimbursement have led to larger discrepancies between the relative cost of Medicare patients and privately insured patients. The purpose of this study was to compare reimbursement between Medicare Advantage and other insurance plans in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Patients of a single commercial payor source who underwent primary unilateral TKA or THA at 1 institution between the dates of January 4 and June 30, 2021, were included (n = 833). Variables included insurance type, medical comorbidities, total costs, and surplus amounts. The primary outcome measure was revenue surplus between Medicare Advantage and Private Commercial plans. t-tests, Analyses of Variance, and Chi-Squared tests were used for analysis. A THA represented 47% of cases and a TKA 53%. Of these patients, 31.5% had Medicare Advantage and 68.5% had Private Commercial insurance. Medicare Advantage patients were older and had higher medical comorbidity risk for both TKA and THA.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed in medical costs between Medicare Advantage and Private Commercial insurance for THA ($17,148 versus $31,260, P < .001) and TKA ($16,723 versus $33,593, P < .001). Additionally, differences were seen in surplus amounts between Medicare Advantage and Private Commercial insurance for THA ($3,504 versus $7,128, P < .001) and TKA ($5,581 versus $10,477, P < .001). Deficits were higher in Private Commercial patients undergoing TKA (15.2 versus 6%, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The lower average surplus associated with Medicare Advantage plans may lead to financial strain on provider groups who care for these patients and face additional overhead costs.

Assessment of a Private Payer Bundled Payment Model for Lumbar Decompression Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Although bundled payment models are well-established in Medicare-aged individuals, private insurers are now developing bundled payment plans. The role of these plans in spine surgery has not been evaluated. Our objective was to analyze the performance of a private insurance bundled payment program for lumbar decompression and microdiskectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all lumbar decompressions in a private payer bundled payment model at a single institution from October 2018 to December 2020. 120-day episode of care cost data were collected and reported as net profit or loss regarding set target prices. A stepwise multivariable linear regression model was developed to measure the effect of patient and surgical factors on net surplus or deficit.

RESULTS

Overall, 151 of 468 (32.2%) resulted in a deficit. Older patients (58.6 vs. 50.9 years, P < 0.001) with diabetes (25.2% vs. 13.9%, P = 0.004), hypertension (38.4% vs. 28.4%, P = 0.038), heart disease (13.9% vs. 7.57%, P = 0.030), and hyperlipidemia (51.7% vs. 35.6%, P = 0.001) were more likely to experience a loss. Surgically, decompression of more levels (1.91 vs. 1.19, P < 0.001), posterior lumbar decompression (86.8% vs. 56.5%, P < 0.001), and performing surgery at a tertiary hospital (84.8% vs. 70.3%, P < 0.001) were more likely to result in loss. All readmissions resulted in a loss (4.64% vs. 0.0%, P < 0.001). On multivariable regression, microdiskectomy (β: $2,398, P = 0.012) and surgery in a specialty hospital (β: $1,729, P = 0.096) or ambulatory surgery center (β: $3,534, P = 0.055) were associated with cost savings. Increasing number of levels, longer length of stay, active smoking, and history of cancer, dementia, or congestive heart failure were all associated with degree of deficit.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperatively optimizing comorbidities and using risk stratification to identify those patients who may safely undergo surgery at a facility other than an inpatient hospital may help increase cost savings in a bundled payment model of working-age and Medicare-age individuals.

Risk Should Not Be a "Four-Letter Word" in Healthcare. Risk and the Future of Musculoskeletal Care

Orthopaedics has seen a rapid transition to value-based care. As we transition away from fee-for-service models, healthcare systems, groups, and surgeons are being asked to take on an increasing amount of risk. While on the surface risk may have a negative connotation, managing risk allows surgeons to maintain autonomy while taking on value-based care to the next level. The purpose of this paper, the first in a series of 2, is to walk through the impact that value-based care has had on musculoskeletal surgeons, to understand the continued movement healthcare is making into risk sharing models, and to introduce the concept of surgeon specialist-led care.

Bundled Care in Elective Total Joint Replacement: Payment Models in Sweden, Canada, and the United States: A Critical Analysis Review

➢

Rising health-care expenditures and payer dissatisfaction with traditional models of reimbursement have driven an interest in alternative payment model initiatives.

➢

Bundled payments, an alternative payment model, have been introduced for total joint replacement in Sweden, the United States, and Canada to help to curb costs, with varying degrees of success.

➢

Outpatient total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty are becoming increasingly common and provide value for patients and payers, but have negatively impacted providers participating in bundled payment models due to considerable losses and decreased reimbursement.

➢

A fine balance exists between achieving cost savings for payers and enticing participation by providers in bundled payment models.

➢

The design of each model is key to payer, provider, and patient satisfaction and should feature comprehensive coverage for a full cycle of care whether it is in the inpatient or outpatient setting, is linked to quality and patient-reported outcomes, features appropriate risk adjustment, and sets limits on responsibility for unrelated complications and extreme outlier events.

Identifying and Creating Value for Employed Arthroplasty Surgeons in an Era of Decreasing Reimbursement

Recent regulatory changes made by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will result in a 9% decrease in reimbursement for hip and knee replacements by the end of 2022. Combining this with CMS's recent removal of total knee and total hip arthroplasty from the inpatient-only list has begun to take effect on the bottom line for hospital systems, which now employ around 50% of the arthroplasty community. Employed joint replacement surgeons should continue to innovate and be leaders within their hospital systems in the outpatient and ambulatory surgery space to recoup lost value, increase autonomy, and should be compensated for this work. Employed arthroplasty surgeon leaders can better align goals with and control the narrative in the C-suite to redefine their value as the most consistent, dependable, and transparent department within a larger health system or corporate medical group.

Life After BPCI: High Quality Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty Care Can Still Exist Outside of a Bundled Payment Program

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding target price methodology and financial penalties have led to withdrawal from Medicare bundled payment programs for total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA), despite its early successful results. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was any difference in patient comorbidities and outcomes following our institution's exit from the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement - Advanced (BPCI-A).

METHODS

We reviewed consecutive 2,737 primary TKA and 2,009 primary THA patients following our withdraw from BPCI-A January 1, 2020-March 30, 2021 and compared them to 1,203 TKA and 1,088 THA patients from October 1, 2018-August 2, 2019 enrolled in BPCI-A. We compared patient demographics, comorbidities, discharge disposition, complications, and 90-day readmissions. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify if bundle participation was associated with complications or readmissions.

RESULTS

Post-bundle TKA had shorter length of stay (1.4 vs 1.8 days, P < .001). Both TKA and THA patients were significantly less likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility (5.6% vs 19.2%, P < .001 and 6.0% vs 10.0%, P < .001, respectively). Controlling for confounders, post-bundle TKA had lower complications (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, P = .037) but no difference in 90-day readmission (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.55-1.16, P = .224).

CONCLUSIONS

Since leaving BPCI-A, we have maintained high quality THA care and improved TKA care with reduced complications and length of stay under a fee-for-service model. Furthermore, we have lowered rehabilitation discharge for both TKA and THA patients. CMS should consider partnering with high performing institutions to develop new models for risk sharing.

New-Onset Depression After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Consideration of the At-Risk Patient

BACKGROUND

Postoperative new-onset depression (NOD) has gained recent attention as a previously unrecognized complication which may put patients at risk for poor outcomes after elective total hip arthroplasty. We aimed to investigate risk factors for the development of NOD after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and assess its association with postoperative complications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, population-level investigation of elective TKA patients. Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of depression were excluded from this study. Two groups were compared: patients who were diagnosed with depression within one year after TKA (NOD) and those who did not (control). The association of both preoperative patient factors and postoperative surgical and medical complications with NOD was then determined using multivariate and univariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 196,728 unique TKA patients in our cohort, 5351 (2.72%) were diagnosed with NOD within one year of TKA. Age <54 year old, female gender, preoperative anxiety disorder, drug, alcohol, and/or tobacco use, multiple comorbidities, and opioid use before TKA were all associated with a diagnosis of NOD postoperatively (all P < .001). Postoperative NOD was associated with periprosthetic fracture (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.29-3.52; P = .033), aseptic failure (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.24-2.07; P = .020), prosthetic joint infection (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.30-1.85; P < .001), stroke (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.09-1.42; P = .006), and venous thromboembolism (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.12-1.37; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Post-TKA NOD is common and is associated with poor outcomes. This may aid surgeons in developing both anticipatory measures and institute preventative measures for patients at risk for developing NOD.

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score is Not an Accurate Predictor of Treatment Costs for Total Joint Replacement Patients in a Medicare Bundled Payment Population

BACKGROUND

Medically complex patients require more resources and experience higher costs within total joint arthroplasty (TJA) bundled payment models. While risk adjustment would be beneficial for such patients, no tool currently exists which can reliably identify these patients preoperatively. The purpose of this study is to determine if the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) is a valid predictor of high-TJA treatment costs.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent primary TJA between 2015 and 2020 from a single large orthopedic practice. ICD-10 codes from an institutional database were used to calculate HFRS. Cost data including inpatient, postacute, and episode of care (EOC) costs were collected. Charlson comorbidity index, demographics, readmissions, and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

4936 patients had a calculable HFRS and those with intermediate and high scores experienced more frequent readmissions/complications after TJA, as well as higher EOC costs. However, HFRS did not reliably predict EOC costs, yielding a sensitivity of 49% and specificity of 66%. Multivariate analysis revealed that both patient age and sex are superior individual cost predictors when compared with HFRS. Secondary analyses indicated that HFRS more effectively predicts TJA complications and readmissions but is still nonideal for clinical applications.

CONCLUSION

HFRS has poor sensitivity as a predictor of high-EOC costs for TJA patients but has adequate specificity for predicting postoperative readmissions and complications. Further research is needed to develop a scale that can appropriately predict orthopedic cost outcomes.

Disparities Among Leading Publishers of Arthroplasty Research

BACKGROUND

Despite the importance of diversity in advancing scientific progress, diversity among leading authors in arthroplasty has not been examined. This study aimed to identify, characterize, and assess disparities among leading authors in arthroplasty literature from 2002 to 2019.

METHODS

Articles published between 2002 and 2019 from 12 academic journals that publish orthopedic and arthroplasty research were extracted from PubMed. Original articles containing keywords related to arthroplasty were analyzed. Author gender was assigned using the Genderize algorithm. Gender and characterization of the top 100 male and female authors utilized available information on academic profiles.

RESULTS

From the 14,692 articles that met inclusion criteria, the genders of 23,626 unique authors were identified. Women were less likely than men to publish 5 years after beginning their publishing careers (adjusted odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.57, P < .001). Of the top 100 authors, 96 were men, while only 4 were women. Orthopedic surgeons made up 93 of 100 top authors, of which 92 were men and 1 was a woman. Among the top 10 publishing female and male authors, 10 of 10 men were orthopedic surgeons, only 2 of 10 women were physicians, and only one was an attending orthopedic surgeon.

CONCLUSION

While the majority of authors with high arthroplasty publication volume were orthopedic surgeons, there were significant gender disparities among the leading researchers. We should continue working to increase gender representation and supporting the research careers of women in arthroplasty.

Analysis of 20-Year Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Reconstructive Microsurgery

BACKGROUND

 Microsurgery is being increasingly utilized across surgical specialties, including plastic surgery. Microsurgical techniques require greater time and financial investment compared with traditional methods. This study aimed to evaluate 20-year trends in Medicare reimbursement and utilization for commonly billed reconstructive microsurgery procedures from 2000 to 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Microsurgical procedures commonly billed by plastic surgeons were identified. Reimbursement data were extracted from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for each current procedural terminology (CPT) code. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 U.S. dollars. The average annual and total percentage changes in reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends. To assess utilization trends, CMS physician/supplier procedure summary files were queried for the number of procedures billed by plastic surgeons from 2010 to 2018.

RESULTS

 After adjusting for inflation, the average reimbursement for all procedures decreased by 26.92% from 2000 to 2019. The greatest mean decrease was observed in CPT 20969 free osteocutaneous flaps with microvascular anastomosis (-36.93%). The smallest mean decrease was observed in repair of blood vessels with vein graft (-9.28%). None of the included procedures saw an increase in reimbursement rate over the study period. From 2000 to 2019, the adjusted reimbursement rate for all procedures decreased by an average of 1.35% annually. Meanwhile, the number of services billed to Medicare by plastic surgeons across the included CPT codes increased by 42.17% from 2010 to 2018.

CONCLUSION

 This is the first study evaluating 20-year trends in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement and utilization in reconstructive microsurgery. Reimbursement for all included procedures decreased over 20% during the study period, while number of services increased. Increased consideration of these trends will be important for U.S. policymakers, hospitals, and surgeons to assure continued access and reconstructive options for patients.