Orthopaedic Shoulder Surgery in the Ambulatory Surgical Center: Safety and Outcomes

Pulmonary embolism after shoulder surgery: Is it a real threat?

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a rare but devastating complication of shoulder surgery. Apart from increased morbidity and mortality rates, it may significantly impair postoperative recovery and functional outcome. Its frequency accounts for up to 5.7% of all shoulder surgery procedures with a higher occurrence in women and patients older than 70 years. It is most commonly associated with thrombophilia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, smoking, hypertension, and a history of malignancy. PE usually occurs secondary to upper or lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, in rare cases, the source of the thrombi cannot be determined. Prophylaxis for PE following shoulder surgery remains a topic of debate, and the standard of care does not routinely require prophylactic medication for DVT prophylaxis. Early ambulation and elastic stockings are important preventative measures for DVT of the lower extremity and medical agents such as aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin, and vitamin K antagonists are indicated for high-risk patients, long-lasting operations, or concomitant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The most common symptoms of PE include chest pain and shortness of breath, but PE can also be asymptomatic in patients with intrinsic tolerance of hypoxia. Patients with DVT may also present with swelling and pain of the respective extremity. The treatment of PE includes inpatient or outpatient anticoagulant therapy if the patient is hemodynamically unstable or stable, respectively. Hemodynamic instability may require transfer to the intensive care unit, and cardiovascular arrest can be implicated in fatal events. An important issue for patients with PE in the postoperative period after shoulder surgery is residual stiffness due to a delay in rehabilitation and a prolonged hospital stay. Early physiotherapy and range-of-motion exercises do not adversely affect the prognosis of PE and are highly recommended to preserve shoulder mobility and function.

Effect of surgery setting for outpatient shoulder procedures on early postoperative complications in a military population

BACKGROUND

There has been a recent push to transition procedures previously performed at hospital-based outpatient surgical departments (HOPDs) to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). However, limited data regarding differences in early postoperative complications and care utilization (eg, emergency department visits and unplanned admissions) may drive increased overall costs or worse outcomes.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to examine differences in early 90-day adverse outcomes and postoperative emergency department visits associated with shoulder surgeries excluding arthroplasties that were performed in HOPDs and ASCs in a closed military health care system. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcomes between treatment settings.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the records for 1748 elective shoulder surgeries from 2015 to 2020. Patients were considered as 1 of 2 cohorts depending on whether they underwent surgery in an ASC or HOPD setting. We evaluated groups for differences incomplexity, surgical time, and medical risk. Outcome measures were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions, and complications within the first 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

There was no difference in 90-day postoperative emergency department visits between procedures performed at HOPDs (n = 606) and ASCs (n = 1142). There was a slight increase in rate of unplanned hospital admission within 90 days after surgery in the HOPD cohort, most commonly for pain or overnight observation. The surgical time was significantly shorter (105 vs. 119 minutes, P < .01) at the ASC, but there was no difference in case complexity between the cohorts (P = .28).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that in appropriate patients, surgery in ASCs can be safely leveraged for its costs savings, efficiency, patient satisfaction, decreases in operative time, and potentially decreased resource utilization both during surgery and in the early postoperative period.

Ambulatory Surgery Centers Reduce Patient Out-of-Pocket Expenditures for Isolated Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair, but Patient Out-of-Pocket Expenditures Are Increasing at a Faster Rate Than Total Healthcare Utilization Reimbursement From Payers

PURPOSE

To categorize and trend annual out-of-pocket expenditures for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) patients relative to total healthcare utilization (THU) reimbursement and compare drivers of patient out-of-pocket expenditures (POPE) in a granular fashion via analyses by insurance type and surgical setting.

METHODS

Patients who underwent outpatient arthroscopic RCR in the United States from 2013 to 2018 were identified from the IBM MarketScan Database. Primary outcome variables were total POPE and THU reimbursement, which were calculated for all claims in the 9-month perioperative period. Trends in outcome variables over time and differences across insurance types were analyzed. Multivariable analysis was performed to investigate drivers of POPE.

RESULTS

A total of 52,330 arthroscopic RCR patients were identified. Between 2013 and 2018, median POPE increased by 47.5% ($917 to $1,353), and median THU increased by 9.3% ($11,964 to $13,076). Patients with high deductible insurance plans paid $1,910 toward their THU, 52.5% more than patients with preferred provider plans ($1,253, P = .001) and 280.5% more than patients with managed care plans ($502, P = .001). All components of POPE increased over the study period, with the largest observed increase being POPE for the immediate procedure (P = .001). On multivariable analysis, out-of-network facility, out-of-network surgeon, and high-deductible insurance most significantly increased POPE.

CONCLUSIONS

POPE for arthroscopic RCR increased at a higher rate than THU over the study period, demonstrating that patients are paying an increasing proportion of RCR costs. A large percentage of this increase comes from increasing POPE for the immediate procedure. Out-of-network facility status increased POPE 3 times more than out-of-network surgeon status, and future cost-optimization strategies should focus on facility-specific reimbursements in particular. Last, ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) significantly reduced POPE, so performing arthroscopic RCRs at ASCs is beneficial to cost-minimization efforts.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study highlights that although payers have increased reimbursement for RCR, patient out-of-pocket expenditures have increased at a much higher rate. Furthermore, this study elucidates trends in and drivers of patient out-of-pocket payments for RCR, providing evidence for development of cost-optimization strategies and counseling of patients undergoing RCR.

Current Concepts in the Business of Orthopaedics

Practice management within orthopaedic surgery demands a multifaceted skillset including clinical expertise, technical proficiency, and business acumen, yet the latter is rarely taught during orthopaedic training. As the healthcare system evolves in the United States, surgeons continue to face challenges such as decreasing reimbursements, increased regulatory burdens, and potential for practice acquisition. To remain competitive and provide exceptional care for patients, orthopaedic surgeons must cultivate a business-minded approach. This article highlights the growing significance of the business of orthopaedics and offers guidance on ambulatory surgical center ownership models, effective management of ancillary services, the effect of private equity in orthopaedic practice, real estate investment opportunities in medical office buildings, and the importance of brand recognition. By understanding these concepts, orthopaedic surgeons can exercise greater control over their practice's finances while providing quality care for their patients.

Costs of shoulder and elbow procedures are significantly reduced in ambulatory surgery centers compared to hospital outpatient departments

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has shown the advantages of outpatient surgery for many shoulder and elbow procedures, including cost savings with equivalent safety in appropriately selected patients. Two common settings for outpatient surgeries are ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which function as independent financial and administrative entities, or hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), which are owned and operated by hospital systems. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder and elbow surgery costs between ASCs and HOPDs.

METHODS

Publicly available data from 2022 provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup Tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify shoulder and elbow procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopy, fracture, or miscellaneous. Total costs, facility fees, Medicare payments, patient payment (costs not covered by Medicare), and surgeon's fees were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Cost differences were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven CPT codes were identified. Arthroscopy procedures (n = 16) at ASCs had significantly lower total costs ($2667 ± $989 vs. $4899 ± $1917; P = .009), facility fees ($1974 ± $819 vs. $4206 ± $1753; P = .008), Medicare payments ($2133 ± $791 vs. $3919 ± $1534; P = .009), and patient payments ($533 ± $198 vs. $979 ± $383; P = .009) compared with HOPDs. Fracture procedures (n = 10) at ASCs had lower total costs ($7680 ± $3123 vs. $11,335 ± $3830; P = .049), facility fees ($6851 ± $3033 vs. $10,507 ± $3733; P = .047), and Medicare payments ($6143 ± $2499 vs. $9724 ± $3676; P = .049) compared with HOPDs, although patient payments were not significantly different ($1535 ± $625 vs. $1610 ± $160; P = .449). Miscellaneous procedures (n = 31) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4202 ± $2234 vs. $6985 ± $2917; P < .001), facility fees ($3348 ± $2059 vs. $6132 ± $2736; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3361 ± $1787 vs. $5675 ± $2635; P < .001), and patient payments ($840 ± $447 vs. $1309 ± $350; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. The combined cohort (n = 57) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4381 ± $2703 vs. $7163 ± $3534; P < .001), facility fees ($3577 ± $2570 vs. $6539.1 ± $3391; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3504 ± $2162 vs. $5892 ± $3206; P < .001), and patient payments ($875 ± $540 vs. $1269 ± $393; P < .001) compared with HOPDs.

CONCLUSION

Shoulder and elbow procedures performed at HOPDs for Medicare recipients were found to have average total cost increase of 164% compared with those performed at ASCs (184% savings for arthroscopy, 148% for fracture, and 166% for miscellaneous). ASC use conferred lower facility fees, patient payments, and Medicare payments. Policy efforts to incentivize migration of surgeries to ASCs may translate into substantial health care cost savings.

Enhanced recovery protocols for ambulatory surgery

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, ambulatory surgeries account for up to 87% of all surgical procedures. (1) It was estimated that 19.2 million ambulatory surgeries were performed in 2018 (https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb287-Ambulatory-Surgery-Overview-2019.pdf). Cataract procedures and musculoskeletal surgeries are the most common surgical interventions performed in ambulatory centers. However, more complex surgical interventions, such as sleeve gastrectomies, oncological, and spine surgeries, and even arthroplasties are routinely performed as day cases or in a model of an ambulatory extended recovery. (2-5) The ambulatory surgery centers industry has grown since 2017 by 1.1% per year and reached a market size of $31.2 billion. According to the Ambulatory Surgery Center Association, there is a potential to save $57.6 billion in Medicare costs over the next decade (https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-statistics/market-size/ambulatory-surgery-centers-united-states/). These data suggest an expected rise in the volume of ambulatory (same day) or extended ambulatory (23 h) surgeries in coming years. Similar increases are also observed in other countries. For example, 75% of elective surgeries are performed as same-day surgery in the United Kingdom. (6) To reduce costs and improve the quality of care after those more complex procedures, ambulatory surgery centers have started implementing patient-centered, high-quality, value-based practices. To achieve those goals, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented to reduce the length of stay, decrease costs, increase patients' satisfaction, and transform clinical practices. The ERAS fundamentals for ambulatory surgery are based on five pillars, including (1) preoperative patient counseling, education, and optimization; (2) multimodal and opioid-sparing analgesia; (3) nausea and vomiting, wound infection, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis; (4) maintenance of euvolemia; and (5) encouragement of early mobility. Those pillars rely on interdisciplinary teamwork led by anesthesiologists, surgery-specific workgroups, and safety culture. (2) Research shows that a team of ambulatory anesthesiologists is crucial in improving postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain control. (7) This review will summarize the current evidence on the elements and clinical importance of implementing ERAS protocol for ambulatory surgery.

Value of Ambulatory Modified Radical Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Modified radical mastectomy (MRM) still is largely performed in inpatient settings. This study sought to determine the value (expenditures and complications) of ambulatory MRM.

METHODS

Health Care Utilization Project (HCUP) state databases from 2016 were queried for patients who underwent MRM. The study examined rates of 30-day readmission for surgical-site infection (SSI) or hematoma, charges by index care setting, and predictors of 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

Overall, 8090 patients underwent MRM: 5113 (63 %) inpatient and 2977 (37 %) ambulatory patients. Compared with the patients who underwent inpatient MRM, those who underwent ambulatory MRM were older (61 vs. 59 years), more often white (66 % vs. 57 %), in the lowest income quartile (28 % vs. 21 %), insured by Medicare (43 % vs. 33 %) and residents in a small metro area (6 % vs. 4 %) (all p < 0.01). Of the 5113 patients treated as inpatients, 126 (2.5 %) were readmitted, whereas 50 (1.7 %) of the ambulatory patients were readmitted (p = 0.02). The adjusted charge for inpatient MRM without readmission was $113,878 (range, $107,355-120,402) compared with $94,463 (range, $86,021-102,907) for ambulatory MRM, and the charge for inpatient MRM requiring readmission was $159,355 (range, $147,142-171,568) compared with $139,940 (range, $125,808-154,073) for ambulatory MRM (all p < 0.01). This difference remained significant after adjustment for hospital length of stay. Adjusted logistic regression showed that the ambulatory setting was protective for readmission (odds ratio, 0.49; 95 % confidence interval, 0.35-0.70; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The analyses suggest that ambulatory MRM is both safe and less expensive. The findings advocate that MRM, a last holdout of inpatient care within breast surgical oncology, can be transitioned to the ambulatory setting for appropriate patients.

The Safety of Performing Surgery at Ambulatory Surgery Centers Versus Hospital Outpatient Departments in Older Patients With or Without Multimorbidity

BACKGROUND

Surgery for older Americans is increasingly being performed at ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) rather than hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), while rates of multimorbidity have increased.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether there are differential outcomes in older patients undergoing surgical procedures at ASCs versus HOPDs.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Matched cohort study.

SUBJECTS

Of Medicare patients, 30,958 were treated in 2018 and 2019 at an ASC undergoing herniorrhaphy, cholecystectomy, or open breast procedures, matched to similar HOPD patients, and another 32,702 matched pairs undergoing higher-risk procedures.

MEASURES

Seven and 30-day revisit and complication rates.

RESULTS

For the same procedures, HOPD patients displayed a higher baseline predicted risk of 30-day revisits than ASC patients (13.09% vs 8.47%, P < 0.0001), suggesting the presence of considerable selection on the part of surgeons. In matched Medicare patients with or without multimorbidity, we observed worse outcomes in HOPD patients: 30-day revisit rates were 8.1% in HOPD patients versus 6.2% in ASC patients ( P < 0.0001), and complication rates were 41.3% versus 28.8%, P < 0.0001. Similar patterns were also found for 7-day outcomes and in higher-risk procedures examined in a secondary analysis. Similar patterns were also observed when analyzing patients with and without multimorbidity separately.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of revisits and complications for ASC patients were far lower than for closely matched HOPD patients. The observed initial baseline risk in HOPD patients was much higher than the baseline risk for the same procedures performed at the ASC, suggesting that surgeons are appropriately selecting their riskier patients to be treated at the HOPD rather than the ASC.

Machine Learning Can Accurately Predict Overnight Stay, Readmission, and 30-Day Complications Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop machine learning (ML) models to predict hospital admission (overnight stay) as well as short-term complications and readmission rates following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Furthermore, we sought to compare the ML models with logistic regression models in predicting ACLR outcomes.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients who underwent elective ACLR from 2012 to 2018. Artificial neural network ML and logistic regression models were developed to predict overnight stay, 30-day postoperative complications, and ACL-related readmission, and model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Regression analyses were used to identify variables that were significantly associated with the predicted outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 21,636 elective ACLR cases met inclusion criteria. Variables associated with hospital admission included White race, obesity, hypertension, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification 3 and greater, anesthesia other than general, prolonged operative time, and inpatient setting. The incidence of hospital admission (overnight stay) was 10.2%, 30-day complications was 1.3%, and 30-day readmission for ACLR-related causes was 0.9%. Compared with logistic regression models, artificial neural network models reported superior area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values in predicting overnight stay (0.835 vs 0.589), 30-day complications (0.742 vs 0.590), reoperation (0.842 vs 0.601), ACLR-related readmission (0.872 vs 0.606), deep-vein thrombosis (0.804 vs 0.608), and surgical-site infection (0.818 vs 0.596).

CONCLUSIONS

The ML models developed in this study demonstrate an application of ML in which data from a national surgical patient registry was used to predict hospital admission and 30-day postoperative complications after elective ACLR. ML models developed performed well, outperforming regression models in predicting hospital admission and short-term complications following elective ACLR. ML models performed best when predicting ACLR-related readmissions and reoperations, followed by overnight stay.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective comparative prognostic trial.

Site of service of irrigation and debridement of open finger and hand fractures: a retrospective review of trends and outcomes

Background

Irrigation and debridement (I&D) of open finger and hand fractures can be performed in the emergency department as opposed to the operating room (OR), though reports of postoperative infection rates vary greatly. The authors hypothesized that I&D of open finger and hand fractures in the OR would decrease over time. They also describe rates of postoperative infection, reoperation, readmission, and costs.

Methods

A large nationwide administrative claims dataset was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent I&D after open finger and hand fractures from 2007 to 2016. The incidence of I&D procedures performed outside the OR was reported and trends over the study period were assessed.

Results

The proportion of open finger and hand fractures that underwent I&D outside the OR did not change significantly over time. Rates of postoperative surgical site infection, readmission, and reoperation were higher in the OR cohort at 90 days after the index stay. The OR cohort had greater total costs and out-of-pocket costs for the index stay. At 90 days, the OR cohort had greater total cost, but out-of-pocket costs were similar.

Conclusions

Site of service for treatment of open finger and hand fractures has not significantly changed from 2007 to 2016. Given that total costs are significantly greater among patients undergoing I&D in the OR, prospective trials are needed to assess the safety of treating open finger and hand fractures outside of the OR to optimize management of these injuries.

Level of Evidence

III.

Duration of Care and Operative Time Are the Primary Drivers of Total Charges After Ambulatory Hip Arthroscopy: A Machine Learning Analysis

PURPOSE

To develop a machine learning algorithm to predict total charges after ambulatory hip arthroscopy and create a risk-adjusted payment model based on patient comorbidities.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the New York State Ambulatory Surgery and Services database was performed to identify patients who underwent elective hip arthroscopy between 2015 and 2016. Features included in initial models consisted of patient characteristics, medical comorbidities, and procedure-specific variables. Models were generated to predict total charges using 5 algorithms. Model performance was assessed by the root-mean-square error, root-mean-square logarithmic error, and coefficient of determination. Global variable importance and partial dependence curves were constructed to show the impact of each input feature on total charges. For performance benchmarking, the best candidate model was compared with a multivariate linear regression using the same input features.

RESULTS

A total of 5,121 patients were included. The median cost after hip arthroscopy was $19,720 (interquartile range, $12,399-$26,439). The gradient-boosted ensemble model showed the best performance (root-mean-square error, $3,800 [95% confidence interval, $3,700-$3,900]; logarithmic root-mean-square error, 0.249 [95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.26]; R² = 0.73). Major cost drivers included total hours in facility less than 12 or more than 15, longer procedure time, performance of a labral repair, age younger than 30 years, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) of 1 or greater, African American race, residence in extreme urban and rural areas, and higher household and neighborhood income.

CONCLUSIONS

The gradient-boosted ensemble model effectively predicted total charges after hip arthroscopy. Few modifiable variables were identified other than anesthesia type; nonmodifiable drivers of total charges included duration of care less than 12 hours or more than 15 hours, operating room time more than 100 minutes, age younger than 30 years, performance of a labral repair, and ECI greater than 0. Stratification of patients based on the ECI highlighted the increased financial risk borne by physicians via flat reimbursement schedules given variable degrees of comorbidities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Orthopaedic Procedures Performed at Ambulatory Surgery Centers

BACKGROUND

As part of a market-driven response to the increasing costs of hospital-based surgical care, an increasing volume of orthopaedic procedures are being performed in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). The purpose of the present study was to identify recent trends in orthopaedic ASC procedure volume, utilization, and reimbursements in the Medicare system between 2012 and 2017.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, national study tracked annual Medicare claims and payments and aggregated data at the county level. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate trends in procedure volume, utilization rates, and reimbursement rates, and to identify demographic predictors of ASC utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 1,914,905 orthopaedic procedures were performed at ASCs in the Medicare population between 2012 and 2017, with an 8.8% increase in annual procedure volume and a 10.5% increase in average reimbursements per case. ASC orthopaedic procedure utilization, including utilization across all subspecialties, is strongly associated with metropolitan areas compared with rural areas. In addition, orthopaedic procedure utilization, including for sports and hand procedures, was found to be significantly higher in wealthier counties (measured by average household income) and in counties located in the South.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated increasing orthopaedic ASC procedure volume in recent years, driven by increases in hand procedure volume. Medicare reimbursements per case have steadily risen and outpaced the rate of inflation over the study period. However, as orthopaedic practice overhead continues to increase, other Medicare expenditures such as hospital payments and operational and implant costs also must be evaluated. These findings may provide a source of information that can be used by orthopaedic surgeons, policy makers, investors, and other stakeholders to make informed decisions regarding the costs and benefits of the use of ASCs for orthopaedic procedures.

Surgical Complications After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States

Shoulder arthroplasty has become popular in the treatment of degenerative shoulder conditions in the United States. Shoulder arthroplasty usage has expanded to younger patients with increased surgical indications.

Complication rates and outcomes after outpatient shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

Background

As the number of total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) performed annually increases, some surgeons have begun to shift toward performing TSAs in the outpatient setting. However, it is imperative to establish the safety of outpatient TSA. The purpose of this systematic review was to define complication, readmission, and reoperation rates and patient-reported outcomes after outpatient TSA.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using three databases (PubMed, Ovid, and Embase). English-language publications describing results on complication rates in patients who underwent TSA in an outpatient or ambulatory setting were included. All nonclinical and deidentified database studies were excluded. Bias assessment was conducted with the methodologic index for nonrandomized studies criteria.

Results

Seven studies describing outcomes in outpatient TSA were identified for inclusion. The included studies used varying criteria for selecting patients for an outpatient procedure. The total outpatient 90-day complication rate (commonly including hematomas, wound issues, and nerve palsies) ranged from 7.1%-11.5%. Readmission rates ranged from 0%-3.7%, and emergency and urgent care visits ranged from 2.4%-16.1%. Patient-reported outcomes improved significantly after outpatient TSA in all studies. Two studies found a higher complication rate in the comparative inpatient cohort (P = .023-.027). Methodologic index for nonrandomized studies scores ranged from 9 to 11 (of 16) for noncomparative studies (n = 3), while all comparative studies received a score of a 16 (of 24).

Conclusion

Outpatient TSA in properly selected patients results in a similar complication rate to inpatient TSA. Further studies are needed to aid in determining proper risk stratification to direct patients to inpatient or outpatient shoulder arthroplasty.

Establishing and comparing reference preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores in patients undergoing shoulder surgery

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has become increasingly popular among orthopedic surgeons treating shoulder pathology. Despite this, there have been few studies that have described and compared preoperative reference scores for specific shoulder surgical procedures. The primary purpose of this study was to establish and compare baseline preoperative PROMIS scores for 3 common types of shoulder surgery: rotator cuff repair (RCR), total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), and labral repair (LR). The secondary goal was to stratify these operative groups by diagnosis and compare preoperative PROMIS scores.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, adult and pediatric patients who underwent surgery for either RCR, TSA, or LR were included. PROMIS-Upper Extremity (UE), PROMIS-Pain Interference (PI), and PROMIS-Depression (D) scores that were collected at each patient's preoperative visit were reviewed. Continuous and categorical variables were compared between operative groups using analysis of variance and χ² or Fisher exact tests, respectively. Multivariable general linear models were used to identify significant independent predictors of PROMIS scores when controlling for age, sex, and body mass index.

RESULTS

A total of 413 patients were included in the study: 272 in the RCR group, 84 in the TSA group, and 57 in the LR group. The average PROMIS-UE score was 39.8 in the LR group vs. 29.9 in the RCR group (P < .001) and 29.6 in the TSA group (P < .001). There was no difference between the mean RCR and TSA PROMIS-UE scores (P = .93). The average PROMIS-PI score was 56.6 in the LR group vs. 62.8 in the RCR group (P < .001) and 63.9 in the TSA group (P < .001). There was no difference between RCR and TSA PROMIS-PI scores (P = .09). The average PROMIS-D score was 43.5 in the LR group vs. 47.7 in the RCR group (P = .004) and 50.3 in the TSA group (P < .001). The TSA group had a higher mean PROMIS-D score than the RCR group (P = .03). For PROMIS-UE scores, age and body mass index were not found to be significant independent predictors (P = .98 and P = .88, respectively). For PROMIS-PI scores, age, body mass index, and sex were not found to be significant independent predictors (P = .31, P = .81, and P = .48, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing shoulder LR had higher preoperative function scores and lower pain interference and depression scores than those undergoing TSA and RCR. These baseline PROMIS scores should be taken into consideration when tracking a patient's outcomes after surgery, as a certain score could mean drastically different functional and pain outcomes depending on the underlying pathology.

Outpatient Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review Evaluating Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic surgical procedures are increasingly being performed in outpatient settings. The drive for cost reduction without compromising patient safety and outcomes has increased interest in outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The primary aim of this study was to perform a review of the evidence regarding the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of outpatient TSA.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed using several keywords: "outpatient," "shoulder replacement," "ambulatory," "day case," "day-case," "shoulder arthroplasty," "same day," and "shoulder surgery." Studies that were published from May 2010 to May 2020 in the English language were considered. Research design, questions, and outcomes were recorded for each study. Qualitative and quantitative pooled analysis was performed on the data where appropriate.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. Six retrospective studies compared complication rates between inpatient and outpatient cohorts and found no significant differences. Four studies found that the complication rate was lower in the outpatient cohort compared with the inpatient cohort. In a pooled analysis, the readmission rate after outpatient TSA was significantly lower than the readmission rate after inpatient TSA at 30 days (0.65% vs. 0.95%) and 90 days (2.03% vs. 2.87%) postoperatively (p < 0.05 for both). Four studies evaluated the cost of outpatient TSA in comparison with inpatient TSA. All of these studies found that TSA at an ambulatory surgery center was significantly less costly than TSA at an inpatient facility, both for the health-care system and for the patient. Patient selection for outpatient TSA may depend on several important factors, including the presence or absence of diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, poor functional status, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class, chronic narcotic use, higher body mass index, and older age.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that patient selection is the most critical factor that predicts the success of outpatient TSA. While outpatient TSA is significantly less costly than inpatient TSA, patients undergoing outpatient TSA are more likely to be healthier than patients undergoing inpatient TSA. More high-quality long-term studies are needed to add to this body of evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Administrative Databases Used for Sports Medicine Research Demonstrate Significant Differences in Underlying Patient Demographics and Resulting Surgical Trends

PURPOSE

To discern differences between the PearlDiver and MarketScan databases with regards to patient demographics, costs, reoperations, and complication rates for isolated meniscectomy.

METHODS

We queried the PearlDiver Humana Patient Records Database and the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database for all patients who had record of meniscectomy denoted by Current Procedure Terminology 29880 or 29881 between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2016. Those that had any other knee procedure at the same time as the meniscectomy were excluded, and the first instance of isolated meniscectomy was recorded. Patient demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index, reoperations, 30- and 90-day complication rates, and costs were collected from both databases. Pearson's χ² test with Yate's continuity correction and the Student t test were used to compare the 2 databases, and an alpha value of 0.05 was set as significant.

RESULTS

We identified 441,147 patients with isolated meniscectomy from the MarketScan database (0.36% of total database), approximately 10 times the number of patients (n = 49,924; 0.20% of total database) identified from PearlDiver. The PearlDiver population was significantly older (median age: 65-69) than the MarketScan cohort, where all patients were younger than 65 (median age: 52; P < .001). Average Charlson Comorbidity Index was significantly lower for MarketScan (0.172, standard deviation [SD]: 0.546) compared with PearlDiver (1.43, SD: 2.05; P < .001), even when we restricted the PearlDiver cohort to patients younger than 65 years (1.02, SD: 1.74; P < .001). The PearlDiver <65 years subcohort also had increased 30- (relative risk 1.53 [1.40-1.67]) and 90-day (relative risk 1.56 [1.47-1.66]) postoperative complications compared with MarketScan. Overall, laterality coding was more prevalent in the PearlDiver database.

CONCLUSIONS

For those undergoing isolated meniscectomy, the MarketScan database comprised an overall larger and younger cohort of patients with fewer comorbidities, even when examining only subjects younger than 65 years of age.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Unplanned admission after ambulatory anaesthesia in France: analysis of a database of 36,584 patients

BACKGROUND

Unplanned admission (UA) after ambulatory procedures is an unexpected event that has organisational and financial impacts. This study was undertaken to determine the current rate of UA in France and to evaluate the factors associated with the occurrence of this event.

METHOD

This is a retrospective analysis of a database of 36,584 patients issued from a private hospital in France. This study received an IRB approval. All of the patients that received ambulatory anaesthesia between April 2015 and June 2017 were included in this database.

RESULTS

The overall rate of UA was 1.8% (95%CI: 1.3-2.3]. Hospitalisation after endoscopic procedures (gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchial fibroscopy) was 1.1% (95%CI: 0.3-1.9), whereas it was 2.5% (95%CI: 1.8-3.2) after surgical procedures (p < 0.01). Organisational concerns, medical reason and surgical complications accounted respectively for one third of the hospitalisations. Pain was liable in 13% of cases, whereas PONV, residual sedation and urinary retention accounted respectively for 6.9%, 2.8% and 2.6% of cases. In a multivariate analysis, age > 60 years, ASA status > 2, general anaesthesia and the type of the procedures were identified risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cohort of ambulatory patients, the rate of UA remains significant. This is probably related, at least partly, to more invasive procedures scheduled in ambulatory setting. However, organisational problems occurred still frequently. Some factors appear to be easily improvable by appropriate preoperative information, better operating theatre scheduling and better analgesic strategy.

Routine postoperative laboratory tests are unnecessary after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Obtaining postoperative laboratory studies after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a common practice. However, justification of this practice remains unclear. This study assesses the utility of routine postoperative laboratory studies in RSA.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of 369 patients who underwent RSA over 10 years were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 213 patients qualified for analysis. Primary outcomes were intervention related to abnormal laboratory values, length of stay, and 90-day emergency department visits/readmissions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with abnormal laboratory values and postoperative visits/readmissions.

RESULTS

Of 213 patients analyzed, 188 (88.7%) had abnormal postoperative laboratory values: 69% had an abnormal hemoglobin (Hgb) or hematocrit level, but only 12% underwent interventions. Lower preoperative Hgb was a significant predictor of receiving a transfusion. A significant association existed between abnormal postoperative electrolyte and creatinine levels with lower body mass index (BMI) and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Only 4 patients (1.8%) received non-transfusion related intervention. Emergency department visits were not statistically different between patients with positive or negative laboratory tests (P = .73).

CONCLUSION

Because 87.3% of laboratory studies did not influence patient management, we recommend against routine testing for primary RSA. This study demonstrates that the practice of obtaining routine postoperative laboratory studies is not justified. We recommend selectively obtaining a postoperative basic metabolic profile in patients with increased American Society of Anesthesiologists classification and/or CCI with a lower BMI. We also recommend selectively ordering postoperative complete blood count in patients with a lower preoperative Hgb.

Primary single-level lumbar microdisectomy/decompression at a free-standing ambulatory surgical center vs a hospital-owned outpatient department-an analysis of 90-day outcomes and costs

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

While free-standing ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) have been extolled as lower cost settings than hospital outpatient facilities/departments (HOPDs) for performing routine elective spine surgeries, differences in 90-day costs and complications have yet to be compared between the two types of treatment facilities.

PURPOSE

We carried a comprehensive analysis to report the differences on payments to providers and facilities as a reflection of true costs to patients, employers and health plans for patients undergoing primary, single-level lumbar microdiscectomy/decompression at ASC versus HOPD.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of Medicare advantage and commercially insured enrollees from the Humana dataset from 2007 to 2017Q1.

OUTCOME MEASURES

To understand the differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, emergency department visits and costs for patients undergoing primary, single-level lumbar microdiscectomy/decompressions at an ASC versus HOPD.

METHODS

The Humana 2007 to 2017Q1 was queried using Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify patients undergoing primary, single-level lumbar microdiscectomy/decompressions. Patients undergoing two-level surgery, open laminectomies, fusions, revision discectomies, and/or deformities were excluded. Service Location codes for HOPD (Location Code 22) and free-standing ASC (Location Code 24) were used to determine surgery treatment facilities. Using propensity scoring, we matched two groups who had surgery performed in ASCs or HOPDs based on age, gender, race, region and Elixhauser comorbidity index. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed on matched cohorts to assess for differences in 90-day outcomes between facilities, while controlling for age, gender, race, region, plan, and Elixhauser comorbidity index.

RESULTS

A total of 1,077 and 10,475 primary single-level decompressions were performed in ASCs and HOPDs, respectively. Following a matching algorithm with propensity scoring, the two cohorts were comprised of 990 patients each. Observed differences in 90-day complication rates were not statistically or clinically significant (ASC=9.1% vs. HOPD=10.3%; p=.362) nor were readmissions (ASC=4.5% vs. HOPD=5.3%; p=.466). On average, performing surgery in an ASC versus HOPD resulted in significant cost savings of over $2,000/case in Medicare Advantage ($5,814 vs. $7,829) and over $3,500/case ($10,116 vs. $13,623) in commercial beneficiaries.

CONCLUSION

Performing single-level decompression surgeries in an ASC compared with HOPDs was associated with approximately $2,000 to $3,500 cost-savings per case with no statistically significant impact on complication or readmission rates.

Editorial Commentary: Is This the Beginning of the End for Hospital-Based Outpatient Surgery Centers? The Wake-Up Call

Self-standing ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) aim, and claim, to decrease cost and improve quality, efficiency, safety, and patient experience. Unsurprisingly, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data may support some or all of these claims, in comparison to hospital-based outpatient surgery centers, ASC patients may be "cherry-picked" for low morbidity or less complex pathology, to name 2 of many factors, resulting in selection bias, which limits the methodologic ability to answer fully this clinical question. Additional bias is inevitably introduced in many regards if surgeons or anesthesia providers have financial interest in an ASC. With a goal of optimizing health care delivery and equity, solutions could include hospitals, surgeons, and anesthesia providers sharing facility ownership in all settings and patients being made aware of all facility costs and safety profiles, as well as their individual morbidity scores. When surgical intervention is necessary, the experience should be consumer driven, results should be high quality, and transparency should allow the best facilities, whether hospital-based or self-standing ASC, and providers to rise to the top with winners and losers.