A cost analysis of ankle fractures treated by orthopedic surgeons with or without foot and ankle fellowship training at ambulatory surgery centers and hospitals

Variability in Surgical Case Volume Performed During ACGME-Accredited Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Fellowship Training

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between case volume and outcomes in foot and ankle surgery. This study elucidates surgical case volume benchmarks for Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedic foot and ankle fellowship training in the United States.

METHODS

The ACGME provided case logs for orthopaedic residents and foot and ankle fellows (2018-2021). Variabilities in reported fellowship case volumes were defined as the fold-difference between 90th and 10th percentiles. Reported case volumes were compared between training cohorts with parametric tests.

RESULTS

Case logs from 65 orthopaedic foot and ankle fellows and 3146 orthopaedic residents were included. Fellows reported 1.3- to 1.5-fold more foot and ankle cases during fellowship training than during residency training (P < .001). On average, orthopaedic foot and ankle fellows reported 405.4 cases and most were arthrodesis (17%), forefoot reconstruction (17%), mid/hindfoot reconstruction (13%), tendon repair/transfer (12%), and trauma ankle hindfoot (11%). Case categories with the highest variabilities were amputation (14.8-fold difference), infection/tumor (11.6-fold difference), arthroscopy (9.2-fold difference), and calcaneus (8.7-fold difference).

DISCUSSION

Case volume benchmarks can assist trainees and faculty during orthopaedic foot and ankle training. More research is needed to determine case minimum requirements needed for autonomous practice in foot and ankle surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Range of motion measurements do not correlate with patient reported outcome measures in the early post-operative period following ankle fracture

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization following ankle fracture open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) improves long-term patient functionality. Because of this, numerous resources have been spent to increase patient adherence to post-operative mobilization, with range of motion (ROM) measurements generally considered an important outcome in patient recovery. In this study we investigated how ankle ROM correlates to patient function, self-sufficiency in performing activities of daily living (ADLs), and pain in the early post-operative period.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study on patients undergoing ORIF of ankle fractures. We collected patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and ROM measurements at the 2-week, 6-week, 12-week, and 6 month post-operative visit. We collected three PROMs: pain intensity (VAS), pain self-efficacy questionnaire (PSEQ-2), and foot and ankle ability measurement (FAAM). ROM of the ankle was measured by goniometer. ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests were used to examine statistical differences in PROMs over time. Pearson correlation tests were used to examine the association between ROM and PROMs.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty-three participants enrolled in this study in the perioperative period. Pain intensity was higher at enrollment compared to week 6 (post-hoc p = 0.006), after which pain intensity did not differ significantly. FAAM scores for activities or daily living (ADL) were increased at all study visits compared to enrollment (post-hoc p < 0.001). FAAM-Sports scores were higher compared to enrollment at the week 12 and 6 month visits (post-hoc p < 0.001). No significant improvements in goniometer measurements were noted across any timepoints. There were no significant correlations between ROM and PROMs at any of the study visits.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of patients, there was no correlation between ROM and patient pain, self-efficacy or functionality in the early post-operative period following ankle ORIF. The lack of correlation between PROMs and ROM indicates that ROM may be both a poor indicator of patient improvement for physicians to guide post-operative treatment as well as a poor motivator for patient adherence to post-operative exercises. In the future, it is important to study reliable outcome measures in early recovery that can be utilized to track patient recovery from ankle ORIF.

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

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to categorize and trend annual out-of-pocket expenditures for arthroscopic 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 U.S. 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

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=0.001) and 280.5% more than patients with managed care plans ($502, p=0.001). All components of POPE increased over the study period with the largest observed increase being POPE for the immediate procedure (p=0.001). On multivariable analysis, out-of-network facility, out-of-network surgeon, and high deductible insurance most significantly increased POPE.

CONCLUSION

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 three times more than out-of-network surgeon status, and future cost-optimization strategies should focus on facility-specific reimbursements in particular. Lastly, ASCs significantly reduced POPE, so performing arthroscopic RCRs at ASCs is beneficial to cost-minimization efforts.