The Increasing Financial Burden of Outpatient Elective Surgery for the Privately Insured

Postoperative hand therapy and the 2018 Medicare therapy cap repeal: Appraising cost and use changes

BACKGROUND

Therapy use is common following carpal tunnel release (CTR), trigger finger release, ganglion cyst excision, De Quervain tenosynovitis release, carpometacarpal arthroplasty, and distal radius fracture, open reduction internal fixation or percutaneous pinning (DRF). Policy that improves coverage influences the cost and use of health care services.

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate changes to the cost and use of postoperative hand therapy by race and procedure following the repeal of a longstanding annual Medicare outpatient therapy cap.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

This is a longitudinal retrospective cohort study using a quasi-experimental interrupted time series design, including patients who underwent common hand surgeries from January 1, 2016-December 31, 2019.

RESULTS

This study included 203,672 patients with a mean age of 71.4 years. Neither White (1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.999-1.007, p = 0.45) nor non-White (1.00, 95% CI: 1.00-1.01, p = 0.06) patients experienced monthly changes in therapy use before policy implementation. Therapy frequency increased following CTR (odds ratio [OR] 1.12, 95% CI: 1.11-1.14, p < 0.001), trigger finger release (OR 1.09, 95% CI: 1.07-1.10, p < 0.001), and DRF (OR 1.05, 95% CI: 1.03-1.06, p < 0.001) following implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that improved coverage was associated with increased postoperative therapy use among some subsets, including CTR and DRF, suggesting the need to optimize coverage by means such as prior authorization or bundled payments, rather than only increasing coverage benefits.

Factors influencing patient selection of orthopaedic surgeons for total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA)

INTRODUCTION

The importance of identifying how patients choose their healthcare providers has grown with the prevalence of consumer-centric health insurance plans. There is currently a lack of studies exploring the factors associated with how patients select their hip and knee joint arthroplasty surgeons. The purpose of this study was to determine how patients find their arthroplasty providers and the relative importance of various arthroplasty surgeon characteristics.

METHODS

An electronic mail survey was sent to 3522 patients who had visited our institution for an arthroplasty surgeon office visit between August 2022 and January 2023. The survey consisted of multiple-choice questions, which aimed to inquire about the patients' referral sources for their current arthroplasty surgeon. In addition, patients were requested to rate the significance of 22 surgeon-related factors, on a scale of 1 (Not Important At All) to 5 (Very Important), in choosing their arthroplasty surgeon.

RESULTS

Of the 3522 patients that received the survey, 538 patients responded (15.3%). The most common referral sources were physician referral (50.2%), family/friend referral (27.7%), and self-guided research (24.5%). Of those that were referred by a physician, 54.4% of respondents were referred by another orthopaedic provider. Patients rated board certification (4.72 ± 0.65), in-network insurance status (4.66 ± 0.71), fellowship training (4.50 ± 0.81), bedside manner/personality (4.32 ± 0.86), and facility appearance (4.26 ± 0.81) as the five most important factors in picking an arthroplasty surgeon. Television (1.42 ± 0.83), print (1.50 ± 0.88), and online (1.58 ± 0.93) advertisements, along with social media presence (1.83 ± 1.08), and practice group size (2.97 ± 1.13) were rated as the five least important factors.

CONCLUSION

Patients are most likely to select an arthroplasty surgeon based on referral from other physicians, namely orthopedic surgeons, in addition to board certification status, in-network insurance, and fellowship training. Overall, these findings highlight the importance of physician credentials and reputation within the orthopaedic community in order to attract and retain patients.

Trends in Costs and Professional Reimbursements for Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

With increasing numbers of revision total hip and total knee arthroplasties (rTHAs and rTKAs), understanding trends in related out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, overall costs, and provider reimbursements is critical to improve patient access to care.

METHODS

A large database was used to identify 92,116 patients who underwent rTHA or rTKA between 2009 and 2018. The OOP costs associated with the surgery and related inpatient care were calculated as the sum of copayment, coinsurance, and deductible payments. Professional reimbursement was calculated as total payments to the principal physician. All monetary data were adjusted to 2018 dollars. Multivariate regressions evaluated the associations between costs and procedure type, insurance type, and region of service.

RESULTS

From 2009 to 2018, overall costs for rTHA significantly increased by 35.0% and overall costs for rTKA significantly increased by 32.3%. The OOP costs for rTHA had no significant changes, while OOP costs for rTKA increased by 20.1%, with patients on Medicare plans having the lowest OOP costs. Professional reimbursements, when measured as a percentage of overall costs, decreased significantly by 4.4% for rTHA and 4.0% for rTKA, with the lowest reimbursements from Medicare plans.

CONCLUSION

From 2009 to 2018, total costs related to rTHA and rTKA significantly increased. The OOP costs significantly increased for rTKA, and professional reimbursements for both rTHA and rTKA decreased relative to total costs. Overall, these trends may combine to create greater financial burden to patients and the healthcare system, as well as further limit patients' access to revision arthroplasty care.

How Have Patient Out-of-pocket Costs for Common Outpatient Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgical Procedures Changed Over Time? A Retrospective Study From 2010 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs can be substantial financial burdens for patients and may even cause patients to delay or forgo necessary medical procedures. Although overall healthcare costs are rising in the United States, recent trends in patient OOP costs for foot and ankle orthopaedic surgical procedures have not been reported. Fully understanding patient OOP costs for common orthopaedic surgical procedures, such as those performed on the foot and ankle, might help patients and professionals make informed decisions regarding treatment options and demonstrate to policymakers the growing unaffordability of these procedures.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) How do OOP costs for common outpatient foot and ankle surgical procedures for commercially insured patients compare between elective and trauma surgical procedures? (2) How do these OOP costs compare between patients enrolled in various insurance plan types? (3) How do these OOP costs compare between surgical procedures performed in hospital-based outpatient departments and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs)? (4) How have these OOP costs changed over time?

METHODS

This was a retrospective, comparative study drawn from a large, longitudinally maintained database. Data on adult patients who underwent elective or trauma outpatient foot or ankle surgical procedures between 2010 and 2020 were extracted using the MarketScan Database, which contains well-delineated cost variables for all patient claims, which are particularly advantageous for assessing OOP costs. Of the 1,031,279 patient encounters initially identified, 41% (427,879) met the inclusion criteria. Demographic, procedural, and financial data were recorded. The median patient age was 50 years (IQR 39 to 57); 65% were women, and more than half of patients were enrolled in preferred provider organization insurance plans. Approximately 75% of surgical procedures were classified as elective (rather than trauma), and 69% of procedures were performed in hospital-based outpatient departments (rather than ASCs). The primary outcome was OOP costs incurred by the patient, which were defined as the sum of the deductible, coinsurance, and copayment paid for each episode of care. Monetary data were adjusted to 2020 USD. A general linear regression, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test were used for analysis, as appropriate. Alpha was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

For foot and ankle indications, trauma surgical procedures generated higher median OOP costs than elective procedures (USD 942 [IQR USD 150 to 2052] versus USD 568 [IQR USD 51 to 1426], difference of medians USD 374; p < 0.001). Of the insurance plans studied, high-deductible health plans had the highest median OOP costs. OOP costs were lower for procedures performed in ASCs than in hospital-based outpatient departments (USD 645 [IQR USD 114 to 1447] versus USD 681 [IQR USD 64 to 1683], difference of medians USD 36; p < 0.001). This trend was driven by higher coinsurance for hospital-based outpatient departments than for ASCs (USD 391 [IQR USD 0 to 1136] versus USD 337 [IQR USD 0 to 797], difference of medians USD 54; p < 0.001). The median OOP costs for common outpatient foot and ankle surgical procedures increased by 102%, from USD 450 in 2010 to USD 907 in 2020.

CONCLUSION

Rapidly increasing OOP costs of common foot and ankle orthopaedic surgical procedures warrant a thorough investigation of potential cost-saving strategies and initiatives to enhance healthcare affordability for patients. In particular, measures should be taken to reduce underuse of necessary care for patients enrolled in high-deductible health plans, such as shorter-term deductible timespans and placing additional regulations on the implementation of these plans. Moreover, policymakers and physicians could consider finding ways to increase the proportion of procedures performed at ASCs for procedure types that have been shown to be equally safe and effective as in hospital-based outpatient departments. Future studies should extend this analysis to publicly insured patients and further investigate the health and financial effects of high-deductible health plans and ASCs, respectively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, economic and decision analysis.

The use and costs of same-day surgery versus overnight admission for total thyroidectomy: A multi-state, all-payer analysis

BACKGROUND

Outpatient thyroidectomy is increasingly favored, given evidence of safety and convenience for selected patients. However, the prevalence of same-day discharge is unclear. We aimed to evaluate temporal trends, hospital characteristics, and costs associated with same-day discharge after total thyroidectomy in an all-payer, multi-state cohort.

METHODS

We included patients aged ≥18 years who underwent a total thyroidectomy (2013-2019) using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data. Admission type was defined as same-day, overnight, or inpatient based on length of stay. Same-day patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 with overnight patients. Hospital characteristics and costs were compared in the matched cohort.

RESULTS

Among 86,187 patients who underwent total thyroidectomy, 16,743 (19.4%) cases were same-day, 59,778 (69.4%) were overnight, and 9,666 (11.2%) were inpatient. The proportion of patients who underwent same-day thyroidectomy increased from 14.8% to 20.8% over the study period (P < .001), whereas overnight admissions decreased from 72.9% to 68.8% (P < .001). In total, 9,571 same-day patients were matched to 9,571 overnight patients. Same-day patients had higher odds of treatment at a certified cancer center (odds ratio 1.77; 95% confidence interval 1.65-1.90), Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited teaching hospital (odds ratio 1.72; 95% confidence interval 1.61-1.85), and high-volume hospital (odds ratio 1.53; 95% confidence interval 1.42-1.65). Pairwise cost differences showed median savings of $974 (interquartile range -1,610 to 3,491) for same-day relative to overnight admission (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although over two-thirds of patients are admitted overnight, same-day total thyroidectomy is increasingly performed. Same-day thyroidectomy may be a lower-cost option for selected patients, particularly in specialty centers with experience in thyroidectomy.

Office-based anesthesia: a contemporary update on outcomes, incentives, and controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The volume of office-based surgery (OBS) has surged over the last 25-30 years, however patients with increasing comorbidities are being considered for procedures in office locations. This review focuses on office-based surgery outcomes, financial incentives driving this change, and controversies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Healthcare economics appear to drive the push towards OBS with improved reimbursements, but there are rising out-of-pocket costs impacting patients. Plastic surgery has low complications, but procedures like buttock augmentation are associated with mortality. In ophthalmology, emerging controversial literature investigates the impact of anesthesia type on and whether anesthesia providers impact ophthalmology outcomes. Dental anesthesia continues to suffer occasional wrong-sided surgeries. Vascular interventions are being driven towards offices due to reimbursements, and may be safely performed. Meta-analyses of ear, nose, and throat in-office surgeries have low complication rates.

SUMMARY

The reported safety supports the proper selection of patients for the proper procedure in the right location. Anesthesiologists need to develop and implement safe and efficient systems to optimize patient outcomes in outpatient office settings. Further research and uniform standardized outcomes tracking are needed in the emerging specialties performing office-based surgery.

Catastrophic Health Expenditures Associated With Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Distal Radius Fractures

PURPOSE

Distal radius fracture is one of the most common upper-extremity traumatic injuries. These injuries result in time off work and potential financial consequences for patients. Therefore, we aimed to understand the risk of catastrophic health expenditures (CHEs) after open reduction and internal fixation of distal radius fractures and examine the association between patient characteristics and the risk of CHE.

METHODS

We used data from patients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation of a distal radius fracture from a large, urban, level I trauma center (2018-2020). The risk of CHE was defined as out-of-pocket expenses of ≥40% of postsubsistence income. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the impact of age, sex, race, and insurance status on the risk of CHE.

RESULTS

In our cohort of 394 patients, 121 patients (30.7%) were at risk of CHE after their distal radius fracture. After controlling for patient characteristics and insurance status, patients aged 26-34 years were 5.7 times more likely to be at risk of CHE (odds ratio, 5.73; 95% CI, 1.81-18.13) than patients aged ≥65 years. Patients who were uninsured were six times more likely to be at risk of CHE than patients with employer-sponsored health insurance (odds ratio, 6.02; 95% CI, 1.94-18.66). Lastly, non-White patients were at a higher risk of CHE (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.70-7.79) than White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Distal radius fractures are unexpected and place patients at risk of financial harm, with one in three patients at risk of CHEs. Policies aimed at minimizing cost-sharing after traumatic injury may help alleviate the financial consequences of health care delivery and reduce disparities.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis II.

Variable Accessibility to Consumer Pricing Among Breast Cancer Operations

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) mandate that every US hospital provide public online pricing information for services rendered. This allows patients to compare prices across hospital systems before establishing care. The goal of this project was to evaluate hospital compliance and patient-level accessibility to price transparency for common breast cancer surgical procedures.

METHODS

A sample case of a 62-year-old female with a T2N0 breast cancer was chosen. The patient would have the option of undergoing a partial mastectomy or mastectomy, both with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Eight Massachusetts academic medical centers were evaluated. Searches were performed by authors for each hospital system and procedure using the sample case.

RESULTS

Every hospital had a cost calculator on its website. The average success rate of establishing a cost for partial mastectomy, mastectomy, and SLNB was 58, 35, and 25%, respectively. The median time to reach the cost calculator tool was 32 s (range 25-37 s). In successful attempts, the median pre-insurance estimated cost of a partial mastectomy was $16,509 (range $11,776-22,169), compared with $24,541 (range $16,921-25,543) for mastectomy and $12,342 (range $4034-20,644) for SLNB. SLNB costs varied significantly across hospitals (p = 0.025), but no statistically significant difference was observed for partial mastectomy or mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

Despite new regulatory requirements by CMS for increased price transparency for surgical procedures, our results demonstrate poor success rates in obtaining cost estimates and significant variability of reported hospital charges. Further efforts to improve the quality of hospital cost estimate calculators are necessary for informed decision-making for patients with breast cancer.

Does Medicaid cover artificial urinary sphincter and male urethral sling surgery?-a state-by-state analysis

Background

Information regarding the Medicaid coverage of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and male suburethral slings (MS) placement in the United States (US) is not readily available. In this manuscript, we seek to elucidate the state-by-state Medicaid coverage of these two procedures in the US.

Methods

State Medicaid websites were utilized to access publicly available physician fee schedules for the calendar year 2020. Fee schedules were searched for current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. CPT codes representing insertion of tandem cuff, insertion of AUS, removal of AUS, removal and replacement AUS, sling operation for correction of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and removal or revision of sling for male SUI were utilized. Data were recorded by the procedure for each device, including the coverage status and physician fees.

Results

Of the 50 US states analyzed, 49 publish publicly accessible physician fee schedules. All 49 of these states reported coverage for removal with and without revision of the AUS, and 48 states reported coverage for insertion of an AUS, and insertion of a tandem cuff. The median reimbursement for each AUS related procedure was $624.00 ($181.84-$10,960.90) for tandem cuff, $665.54 ($199.89-$11,949.86) for AUS insertion, $528.03 ($146.90-$1,893.12) for AUS removal, and $630.29 ($208.55-$11,586.74) for AUS revision. All 49 states reported coverage for placement of MS, and 48 states reported coverage for removal or revision of MS. The median reimbursement was $652.57 ($198.00-$5,237.35) for MS placement and $554.47 ($104.27-$2,288.93) for MS revision.

Conclusions

AUS and MS procedures in the Medicaid population are covered by nearly all states. Therefore, surgical treatment of SUI may be offered to Medicaid patients in most states without reimbursement concerns.

Out-of-Pocket and Total Costs for Common Hand Procedures From 2008 to 2016: A Nationwide Claims Database Analysis

PURPOSE

Rising patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and financial distress have been associated with reduced access to and delays in care. We evaluated whether OOP and total costs for common hand procedures have increased from 2008 to 2016 and identified key drivers of these costs.

METHODS

Using the IBM MarketScan Research Databases, we identified patients who underwent trigger finger release, open carpal tunnel release, thumb carpometacarpal joint arthroplasty, cubital tunnel release, or open treatment of distal radius fracture in the outpatient setting between 2008 and 2016. Patient OOP costs included copayment, coinsurance, and deductible payments. Costs not directly related to medical care, such as transportation and childcare costs, were not included. The overall cost was defined as the sum of the patient OOP cost and insurer reimbursements. We calculated changes in OOP and total overall costs over the study period. We also performed multivariable linear regressions to evaluate the associations between costs and procedure type, insurance type, region, and site of service.

RESULTS

The mean patient OOP cost increased by 55% to 71% and the total overall cost increased by 20% to 45%, depending on the procedure, between 2008 and 2016. Facility overall costs increased by 38%, whereas professional overall costs increased by 9%. Procedures performed in an office-based setting were associated with the lowest patient OOP and total overall costs, whereas high-deductible health plans were associated with the highest OOP costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient OOP and total overall costs increased for the most common hand procedures between 2008 and 2016, driven by a substantial increase in facility costs. Office-based procedures were associated with the lowest costs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

To alleviate the rising patient cost burden, hand surgeons could incorporate OOP cost considerations into shared decision-making tools, identify patients who may benefit from financial counseling, and shift procedures to an office-based setting.

Preventable operating room delays in robotic-assisted thoracic surgery: Identifying opportunities for cost reduction

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to characterize the types of intraoperative delays during robotic-assisted thoracic surgery, operating room staff awareness/perceptions of delays, and cost impact of delays on overall operative costs.

METHODS

Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery cases from May to August 2019 were attended by 3 third-party observers to record intraoperative delays. The postoperative surveys were given to operating room staff to elicit perceived delays. Observed versus perceived delays were compared using the McNemar test. Direct costs and charges per delay were calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-four cases were observed, of which a majority were lobectomies (n = 38 [86%]). A total of 71 delays were recorded by observers, encompassing 75% of cases (n = 33), with an average delay length of 3.6 minutes (±5.3 minutes). The following delays were observed: equipment failure (n = 40, average delay length 5.0 minutes (±6.5 minutes), equipment missing (n = 15, 2.2 minutes [±1.4 minutes]), staff unfamiliarity with equipment (n = 4, 3.4 minutes [± 1.5 minutes]), and other (n = 12, 4.5 minutes [±5.3 minutes]). The detection rates for any intraoperative delay were consistently lower for all of the operating room team members compared with observers, including surgeons (34.3% vs 77.1%; P = .0003), first assistants (41.9% vs 74.2%; P = .0075), surgical technologists (39.4% vs 72.7%; P = .0045), and circulating nurses (41.18% vs 76.47% minutes; P = .0013). The average operating room variable direct cost of delays based on the average total delay length per case was $225.52 (±$350.18) and was 1.6% (range 0-10.6%) of the total case charges.

CONCLUSION

The lack of perception of intraoperative delays hinders operating teams from effectively closing the variable cost gaps. Future studies are needed to explore methods of increasing perception of delays and opportunities to improve operating room efficiency.

Not Clearing the Air: Hospital Price Transparency for a Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

INTRODUCTION

In 2019, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) established a new requirement that all hospitals publish information on the standard costs of services provided. Increased price transparency allows patients to compare healthcare costs and make informed decisions about their care. We investigated compliance with this rule with regards to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a commonly performed operation and one of the 70 shoppable services (SSs) included in the CMS requirement, among prominent hospitals in the United States.

METHODS

The 2021-2022 US News "Best Hospitals for Gastroenterology and GI Surgery" was used to identify the top 50 hospitals for gastrointestinal surgery. Each hospital's website was assessed for the presence of a machine-readable file (MRF) as required by CMS. Each MRF was then evaluated for inclusion of all seven required elements: description of item/service, gross charge, payer-specific negotiated charge, deidentified minimum and maximum negotiated charges, discounted cash price, and billing code. The presence of a consumer-friendly display of SSs was also evaluated. The Current Procedural Terminology code 47562 (removal of gallbladder with an endoscope) was used to search for all six required elements: payer-specific negotiated charge, discounted cash price, de-identified minimum and maximum negotiated charges, campus location of the SS, and billing code. The SS display was further evaluated for provision of additional information on ancillary charges, which are recommended but not required. The MRF and SS were also evaluated for accessibility and date of last update. Hospitals were analyzed according to rank. Compliance with CMS requirements was compared between hospitals.

RESULTS

Fifty one hospitals were included. Of these 51 hospitals, one (2%) provided all the required information for both MRF and SS, 44 (86%) did not provide all necessary components of both the MRF and SS, six (12%) had all necessary elements of an MRF only, and two (4%) had all necessary elements of the SS only. The MRF was accessible in 80% (41) of studied hospitals and 76% (39) provided a gross charge but just 35% (18) of hospitals included the discounted cash price. The SS specified location for all hospitals, indicated a billing code in 96% (49), and provided a payer-specific charge in 96% (48), but less often provided de-identified minimum (30; 59%) and maximum (30; 59%) charges. Thirty nine (76%) hospitals reported that the listed price included an ancillary charge. There was no significant difference between hospitals in having all required elements of both the MRF and SS or the MRF only or SS only.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals are providing healthcare consumers with standard charge information, although with significant variation in what is disclosed. There is no association between hospital reputation and provision of standard charge information.

Patient Out-of-Pocket Cost Burden With Elective Orthopaedic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for medical and surgical care can result in substantial financial burden for patients and families. Relatively little is known regarding OOP costs for commercially insured patients receiving orthopaedic surgery. The aim of this study is to analyze the trends in OOP costs for common, elective orthopaedic surgeries performed in the hospital inpatient setting.

METHODS

This study used an employer-sponsored insurance claims database to analyze billing data of commercially insured patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery between 2014 and 2019. Patients who received single-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF), single-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) were identified. OOP costs associated with the surgical episode were calculated as the sum of deductible payments, copayments, and coinsurance. Monetary data were adjusted to 2019 dollars. General linear regression, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for analysis, as appropriate.

RESULTS

In total, 10,225 ACDF, 28,841 PLF, 70,815 THA, and 108,940 TKA patients were analyzed. Most patients in our study sample had preferred provider organization insurance plans (ACDF 70.3%, PLF 66.9%, THA 66.2%, and TKA 67.0%). The mean OOP costs for patients, by procedure, were as follows: ACDF $3,180 (SD = 2,495), PLF $3,166 (SD = 2,529), THA $2,884 (SD = 2,100), and TKA $2,733 (SD = 1,994). Total OOP costs increased significantly from 2014 to 2019 for all procedures (P < 0.0001). Among the insurance plans examined, patients with high-deductible health plans had the highest episodic OOP costs. The ratio of patient contribution (OOP costs) to total insurer contribution (payments from insurers to providers) was 0.07 for ACDF, 0.04 for PLF, 0.07 for THA, and 0.07 for TKA.

CONCLUSION

Among commercially insured patients who underwent elective spinal fusion and major lower extremity joint arthroplasty surgery, OOP costs increased from 2014 to 2019. The OOP costs for elective orthopaedic surgery represent a substantial and increasing financial burden for patients.

Individualized Out-of-Pocket Price Estimators for "Shoppable" Surgical Procedures: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study of US Hospitals

To estimate the nationwide prevalence of individualized out-of-pocket (OOP) price estimators at US hospitals, characterize patterns of inclusion of 14 specified "shoppable" surgical procedures, and determine hospital-level characteristics associated with estimators that include surgical procedures.

Background

Price transparency for shoppable surgical services is a key requirement of several recent federal policies, yet the extent to which hospitals provide online OOP price estimators remains unknown.

Methods

We reviewed a stratified random sample of 485 U.S. hospitals for the presence of a tool to allow patients to estimate individualized OOP expenses for healthcare services. We compared characteristics of hospitals that did and did not offer online price estimators and performed multivariable modeling to identify facility-level predictors of hospitals offering price estimator with and without surgical procedures.

Results

Nearly two-thirds (66.0%) of hospitals in the final sample (95% confidence interval 61.6%-70.1%) offered an online tool for estimating OOP healthcare expenses. Approximately 58.5% of hospitals included at least one shoppable surgical procedure while around 6.6% of hospitals included all 14 surgical procedures. The most common price reported was laparoscopic cholecystectomy (55.1%), and the least common was recurrent cataract removal (20.0%). Inclusion of surgical procedures varied by total annual surgical volume and health system membership. Only 26.9% of estimators explicitly included professional fees.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight an ongoing progress in price transparency, as well as key areas for improvement in future policies to help patients make more financially informed decisions about their surgical care.

Decreasing Medicare Utilization, Reimbursement, and Reimbursement-to-Charge Ratio of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Procedures: 2010 to 2019

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate recent trends in utilization, reimbursement, and charges for reconstructive plastic surgery procedures billed to Medicare.

METHODS

We queried the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for procedures billed by plastic surgeons to Medicare Part B between 2010 and 2019. We collected service counts, charges, and reimbursements. We adjusted utilization by Medicare enrollment and adjusted monetary values for inflation. We calculated the weighted mean charge and reimbursement, which were used to calculate the reimbursement-to-charge ratio (RCR). We examined trends over time by calculating differences and performing correlation analyses of utilization, charges, reimbursement, and RCR for all procedures and for different procedural categories.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2019, the overall enrollment-adjusted utilization for 912 reconstructive procedures decreased by 6.6% (r2 = 0.46). Utilization increased in certain procedural categories such as skin debridement (+36.9%, r2 = 0.48) and procedures of the breast (+114.9%, r2 = 0.48). Charges increased by 32.9% (r2 = 0.99), reimbursement decreased by 5.3% (r2 = 0.84), and RCR decreased by 28.7% (r2 = 0.99). Skin replacement/flaps/grafts procedures underwent the greatest relative decrease in reimbursement (-26.8%, r2 = 0.87). Reimbursement-to-charge ratio decreased for all procedural categories except for procedures of the auditory system.

CONCLUSIONS

In the past decade, Medicare utilization and reimbursement for reconstructive plastic surgery procedures decreased, whereas charges increased. This resulted in decreasing reimbursement relative to charged amounts. These findings raise concerns regarding the economic viability of providing plastic surgery services to an aging population and may impact patients' ability to access affordable plastic surgical care.

Utilization of Crowdfunding for Cataract and LASIK Procedures

PURPOSE

To study the nature of crowdfunding campaigns for common ophthalmologic procedures.

METHODS

Cross sectional, retrospective study of campaigns on GoFundMe.com from January 1st, 2021 to July 31st, 2021. All domestic and international campaigns referring to cataract and intraocular lens placement or LASIK procedures, excluding those with non-ophthalmologic conditions or campaigns for multiple conditions. Descriptive analysis of campaigns including condition, country of origin of patient, total and median value raised, total and median value sought, age of the patient, funding goal met, insurance status when possible. Total and median funds raised and sought, international versus domestic campaigns, success rate for campaigns, percent of campaigns involving children, percent of campaigns mentioning insurance.

RESULTS

137 campaigns were identified, 67.9% (93/137) were for cataract and 32.1% (44/137) were for LASIK. 13.1% (18/137) of campaigns were international. 7.3% (10/137) campaigns were successful at reaching funding goals. Of successful campaigns, 70.0% (7/10) were for cataract and 30.0% (3/10) were for LASIK. Total value raised (in USD) was $131,763, where $106,593 was for cataract and $25,170 was for LASIK. The median value sought overall was $5,000, where the median sought for cataract procedures was $5,000 and the median for LASIK was $4,000. The median value raised was $395. 5.8% (8/137) of campaigns mentioned minors. 12.5% (1/8) of campaigns for children or minors successfully met funding goals compared to 7.0% (9/129) adult campaigns. The total funds raised for children or minors was $9,224 with a goal of $41,050. The total funds raised for adults was $122,539 out of a goal of $775,617. 14.6% (20/137) campaigns mentioned insurance coverage, of which 85% (17/20) were for cataract and 15.0% (3/20) were for LASIK. Premium lenses (toric, multifocal, etc.) were mentioned in 1.1% of cataract campaigns (1/93) as being cost prohibitive.

CONCLUSIONS

Crowdfunding is ineffective as a means for patients to raise funds for ophthalmic procedures. The broad range of financial requests within campaigns indicates a large patient knowledge gap in cost for procedures.

The Impact of Medicare Coverage on Downstream Financial Outcomes for Adults Who Undergo Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of gaining access to Medicare on key financial outcomes for surgical patients.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Surgical care poses a significant financial burden, especially among patients with insufficient financial risk protection. Medicare may mitigate the risk of these adverse circumstances, but the impact of Medicare eligibility on surgical patients remains poorly understood.

METHODS

Regression discontinuity analysis of national, cross-sectional survey and cost data from the 2008 to 2018 National Health Interview Survey and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Patients were between the ages of 57 to 72 with surgery in the past 12 months. The primary outcomes were the presence of medical debt, delay/deferment of care due to cost, total annual out-of-pocket costs, and experiencing catastrophic health expenditures.

RESULTS

Among 45,982,243 National Health Interview Survey patients, Medicare eligibility was associated with a 6.6 percentage-point decrease (95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.0% to -4.3) in being uninsured (>99% relative reduction), 7.6 percentage-point decrease (24% relative reduction) in having medical debt (95%CI: -14.1% to -1.1%), and 4.9 percentage-point decrease (95%CI: -9.4% to -0.4%) in deferrals/delays in medical care due to cost (28% relative reduction). Among 33,084,967 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey patients, annual out-of-pocket spending decreased by $1199 per patient (95%CI: -$1633 to -$765), a 33% relative reduction, and catastrophic health expenditures decreased by 7.3 percentage points (95%CI: -13.6% to -0.1%), a 55% relative reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare may reduce the economic burden of healthcare spending and delays in care for older adult surgical patients. These findings have important implications for policy discussions regarding changing insurance eligibility thresholds for the older adult population.

Financial Toxicity in Breast Reconstruction: A National Survey of Women Who have Undergone Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite awareness regarding financial toxicity in breast cancer care, little is known about the financial strain associated with breast reconstruction. This study aims to describe financial toxicity and identify factors independently associated with financial toxicity for women pursuing post-mastectomy breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A 33-item electronic survey was distributed to members of the Love Research Army. Women over 18 years of age and at least 1 year after post-mastectomy breast reconstruction were invited to participate. The primary outcome of interest was self-reported financial toxicity due to breast reconstruction, while secondary outcomes of interest were patient-reported out-of-pocket expenses and impact of financial toxicity on surgical decision making.

RESULTS

In total, 922 women were included (mean age 58.6 years, standard deviation 10.3 years); 216 women (23.8%) reported financial toxicity from reconstruction. These women had significantly greater out-of-pocket medical expenses. When compared with women who did not experience financial toxicity, those who did were more likely to have debt due to reconstruction (50.9% vs. 3.2%, p < 0.001). Younger age, lower annual household income, greater out-of-pocket expenses, and a postoperative major complication were independently associated with an increased risk for financial toxicity. If faced with the same decision, women experiencing financial toxicity were more likely to decide against reconstruction (p < 0.001) compared with women not experiencing financial toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one in four women experienced financial toxicity from breast reconstruction. Women who reported higher levels of financial toxicity were more likely to change their decisions about surgery. Identified factors predictive of financial toxicity could guide preoperative discussions to inform decision making that mitigates undesired financial decline.

Shifting Spine Interventional Pain Injections From the Hospital to a Clinic Setting: Increased Efficiency and Decreased Health System Costs

OBJECTIVE

Spine interventional pain injections have dramatically increased in volume in the past three decades. High referral volumes at our institution necessitated using both a hospital-based interventional suite and a clinic-based suite scheduled on a first-come, first-served basis. We sought to determine whether the clinic-based suite provided benefits in efficiency and health system cost in comparison with the hospital suite without compromising quality of care.

METHODS

To investigate differences between outpatient procedures performed in hospital-based procedure rooms (HBPRs) and clinic-based procedure rooms (CBPRs), we reviewed all consecutive outpatient spine interventional pain procedures performed by the interventional neuroradiology service over a 12-month period. We analyzed procedure complexity, fluoroscopic times, procedural times, patient wait times, and health system costs for each case, as well as any complications.

RESULTS

Our analysis demonstrated similar procedural complexity between sites with decreased average fluoroscopic time (112 seconds versus 163 seconds, P = .002), procedural time (17 min versus 28 min, P < .001), and wait time (20 min versus 38 min, P < .001) in the CBPR versus the HBPR. In cases without trainee involvement, procedural and wait times were decreased (P < .001, P = .008) with no difference in fluoroscopy time (P = .18). There were no complications at either site. The analysis of cost to the health system demonstrated that procedures in the HBPR cost >14 times the amount to perform than in the CBPR.

DISCUSSION

Performing spine interventional pain procedures in a CBPR adds value by decreasing procedural, fluoroscopic, wait times, and health system cost compared with an HBPR without compromising safety.

The monthly operating cost of an institutional COVID-19 airway response team: A financial model and sensitivity analysis based on experience at an academic medical center

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) airway response teams concentrate equipment and expertise while minimizing the number of providers exposed to aerosol generating procedures. These airway teams were implemented in various hospitals around the world to respond to the acute increase of critical ill patients requiring ventilatory support. We created a financial model to estimate the costs for staffing and maintaining a dedicated COVID-19 airway response team based on the experience at an urban academic hospital in the Northeastern United States between March and June of 2020.

Methods

The institutional review board at Brigham and Women's Hospital approved this protocol and the requirement for informed consent was waived. The average reimbursement for 125 COVID-19 airway consultations was measured. Our team estimated the costs of consumable items for each airway based on previously published recommendations for equipment and personal protective equipment. A sensitivity analyses was performed for variable numbers of monthly airway consults and different staffing patterns based on a literature review of available COVID-19 airway team structures.

Results

Based on the average reimbursements and estimates of the consumable costs, each airway procedure represented a net loss of $34 to the institution. The overall estimated cost of staffing a dedicated airway team was between $109,472 and $204,575 per month.

Conclusions

Development and implementation of a dedicated COVID-19 airway response teams represents a significant institutional expense. Institutions should establish necessary cost sharing, consider volume and team structure, and identify reimbursement opportunities that mitigate the necessary expense associated with airway response programs.