Estimating cost savings from regionalizing cardiac procedures using hospital discharge data

Isolated decompression for degenerative spondylolisthesis is less costly than fusion even with high revision rates

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Isolated decompression and decompression with instrumented fusion are accepted surgical treatments for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Although isolated decompression is a less costly solution with similar patient-reported outcomes, it is associated with higher rates of re-operation than primary fusion.

PURPOSE

To determine the costs associated with primary decompression, primary fusion, and decompression and fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. We further sought to establish at what revision rate is primary decompression still a less costly surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A retrospective database study of the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MEDPAR) limited data set.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who underwent single-level fusion or decompression for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost of surgical care.

METHODS

All inpatient stays that underwent surgery for single-level lumbar/lumbosacral degenerative spondylolisthesis in the 2019 calendar year (n=6,653) were queried from the MEDPAR limited data set. Patients were stratified into three cohorts: primary decompression (n=300), primary fusion (n=5,757), and revision fusion (n=566). Univariate analysis was conducted to determine cost differences between these groups and results were confirmed with multivariable regression. An economic analysis was then done to determine at what revision rate would primary decompression still be a less costly treatment choice.

RESULTS

on univariate analysis, the cost of primary single-level decompression for spondylolisthesis was $14,690±9,484, the cost of primary single-level fusion was $26,376±11,967, and revision fusion was $26,686±11,309 (p<0.001). on multivariate analysis, primary fusion was associated with an increased cost of $3,751, and revision fusion was associated with increased cost of $7,502 (95%ci: 2,990-4,512, p<0.001). economic analysis found that a revision rate less than or equal to 43.8% would still result in primary decompression being less costly for a practice than primary fusion for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Isolated decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is a less costly treatment choice even with rates of revision fusion as high as 43.8%. This was true even with an assumed revision rate of 0% after primary fusion. This study solely looks at cost data, however, and many patients may still benefit from primary fusion when appropriately indicated.

What Are the Differences in Hospital Cost Associated With the Use of Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Stems in Hemiarthroplasty and Total Hip Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in hospital costs associated with the use of cemented versus cementless femoral stems in hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) for the treatment of femoral neck fracture (FNF).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilizes the 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Limited Data Set. Patients undergoing arthroplasty for the treatment of FNF were identified. Patients were grouped by cemented or cementless femoral stem fixation. There were 16,148 patients who underwent arthroplasty for FNF available: 4,913 THAs (3,705 patients who had cementless femoral stems and 1,208 patients who had cemented femoral stems) and 11,235 HAs (6,099 patients who had cementless femoral stems and 5,136 who had cemented femoral stems). Index hospital costs were estimated by multiplying total charges by cost-to-charge ratios. Costs were analyzed using univariable and multivariable generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Cemented femoral stem THA generated 1.080 times (95% confidence interval, 1.06 to 1.10; P < .001), or 8.0%, greater index hospital costs than cementless femoral stem THA, and cemented femoral stem HA generated 1.042 times (95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.05; P < .001), or 4.2%, greater index hospital costs than cementless femoral stem HA.

CONCLUSIONS

Cemented femoral stems for FNF treated with either THA or HA are associated with only a small portion of increased cost compared to cementless femoral stems. Providers may choose the method of arthroplasty stem fixation for the treatment of FNF based on what they deem most appropriate for the specific patient.

Impact of Race/Ethnicity on Hospital Resource Utilization After Elective Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for Degenerative Myelopathy

INTRODUCTION

With the advent of bundled care payments for spine surgery, there is increasing scrutiny on the costs and resource utilization associated with surgical care. The purpose of this study was to compare (1) the total cost of the hospital episode of care and (2) discharge destination between White, Black, and Hispanic patients receiving elective anterior cervical decompression and fusion for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) in Medicare patients.

METHODS

The 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Limited Data Set and the 2019 Impact File were used for this project. Multivariate models were created for total cost and discharge destination, controlling for confounders found on univariate analysis. We then performed a subanalysis for differences in specific cost-center charges.

RESULTS

There were 11,506 White (85.4%), 1,707 Black (12.7%), and 261 Hispanic (1.9%) patients identified. There were 6,447 males (47.8%) and 7,027 females (52.2%). Most patients were between 65 to 74 years of age (n = 7,101, 52.7%). The mean cost of the hospital episode was $20,919 ± 11,848. Most patients were discharged home (n = 11,584, 86.0%). Race/ethnicity was independently associated with an increased cost of care (Black: $783, Hispanic: $1,566, P = 0.001) and an increased likelihood of nonhome discharge (Black: adjusted odds ratio: 1.990, P < 0.001, Hispanic: adjusted odds ratio: 1.822, P < 0.001) compared with White patients. Compared with White patients, Black patients were charged more for accommodations ($1808), less for supplies (-$1780), and less for operating room (-$1072), whereas Hispanic patients were charged more ($3556, $7923, and $5162, respectively, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity were found to be independently associated with an increased cost of care and risk for nonhome discharge after elective anterior cervical decompression and fusion for DCM compared with White patients. The largest drivers of this disparity appear to be accommodation, medical/surgical supply, and operating room-related charges. Further analysis of these racial disparities should be performed to improve value and equity of spine care for DCM.

Can postoperative process of care utilization or complication rates explain the volume-cost relationship for cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND

Past studies identify an association between provider volume and outcomes, but less is known about the volume-cost relationship for cancer surgery. We analyze the volume-cost relationship for 6 cancer operations and explore whether it is influenced by the occurrence of complications and/or utilization of processes of care.

METHODS

Medicare hospital and inpatient claims for the years 2005 through 2009 were analyzed for 6 cancer resections: colectomy, rectal resection, pulmonary lobectomy, pneumonectomy, esophagectomy, and pancreatic resection. Regressions were first estimated to quantify the association of provider volume with costs, excluding measures of complications and processes of care as explanatory variables. Next, these variables were added to the regressions to test whether they weakened any previously observed volume-cost relationship.

RESULTS

Higher hospital volume is associated with lower patient costs for esophagectomy but not for other operations. Higher surgeon volume reduces costs for most procedures, but this result weakens when processes of care are added to the regressions. Processes of care that are frequently implemented in response to adverse events are associated with 14% to 34% higher costs. Utilization of these processes is more prevalent among low-volume versus high-volume surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Processes of care implemented when complications occur explain much of the surgeon volume-cost relationship. Given that surgeon volume is readily observed, better outcomes and lower costs may be achieved by referring patients to high-volume surgeons. Increasing patient access to surgeons with lower rates of complications may be the most effective strategy for avoiding costly processes of care, controlling expenditure growth.

Cost awareness decreases total percutaneous coronary intervention procedural cost: The SHOPPING (Show How Options in Price for Procedures Can Be Influenced Greatly) trial

OBJECTIVES

We initiated the SHOPPING Trial (Show How Options in Price for Procedures can be InflueNced Greatly) to see if percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures can be performed at a lower cost in a single institution.

BACKGROUND

Procedural practice variability is associated with inefficiency and increased cost. We hypothesized that announcing costs for all supplies during a catheterization procedure and reporting individual operator cost relative to peers would spur cost reduction without affecting clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Baseline costs of 10 consecutive PCI procedures performed by 9 interventional cardiologists were documented during a 90-day interval. Costs were reassessed after instituting cost announcing and peer reporting the next quarter. The intervention involved labeling of all endovascular supplies, equipment, devices, and disposables in the catheterization laboratory and announcement of the unit price for each piece when requested. For each interventionalist, procedure time and costs were measured and analyzed prior to and after the intervention.

RESULTS

We found that total PCI procedural cost was significantly reduced by an average of $234.77 (P = 0.01), equating to a total savings of $21,129.30 over the course of 90 PCI procedures. Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE) rates were similar during both periods (2.3% vs. 3.5%, P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Announcing costs in the catheterization laboratory during single vessel PCI and peer reporting leads to cost reduction without affecting clinical outcomes. This intervention may have a role in more complex coronary and peripheral interventional procedures, and in other procedural areas where multiple equipment and device alternatives with variable costs are available. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

How Well Do All Patient Refined-Diagnosis-Related Groups Explain Costs of Pediatric Cancer Chemotherapy Admissions in the United States?

PURPOSE

State-based Medicaid programs have begun using All Patient Refined-Diagnosis-Related Groups (APR-DRGs) to determine hospital reimbursement rates. Medicaid provides coverage for 45% of childhood cancer admissions. This study aimed to examine how well APR-DRGs reflect admission costs for childhood cancer chemotherapy to inform clinicians, hospitals, and policymakers in the wake of policy changes.

METHODS

We identified 25,613 chemotherapy admissions in the 2009 Kids' Inpatient Database. To determine how well APR-DRGs explain costs, we applied a hierarchic linear regression model of hospital costs, allowing for a variety of patient, hospital, and geographic confounders.

RESULTS

APR-DRGs proved to be the most important predictors of admission costs (P < .001), with costs increasing by DRG severity code. Diagnosis, age, and hospital characteristics also predicted costs above and beyond those explained by APR-DRGs. Compared with admissions for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, costs of admissions for patients with acute myelomonocytic leukemia were 82% higher; non-Hodgkin lymphoma, 20% higher; Hodgkin lymphoma, 25% lower; and CNS tumors, 27% lower. Admissions for children who were 10 years of age or older cost 26% to 35% more than admissions for infants. Admissions to children's hospitals cost 46% more than admissions to other hospital types.

CONCLUSION

APR-DRGs developed for adults are applicable to childhood cancer chemotherapy but should be refined to account for cancer diagnosis and patient age. Possible policy and clinical management changes merit further study to address factors not captured by APR-DRGs.

Impact of processes of care aimed at complication reduction on the cost of complex cancer surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Health care providers add multiple processes to the care of complex cancer patients, believing they prevent and/or ameliorate complications. However, the relationship between these processes, complication remediation, and expenditures is unknown.

METHODS

Data for patients with cancer diagnoses undergoing colectomy, rectal resection, pulmonary lobectomy, pneumonectomy, esophagectomy, and pancreatic resection were obtained from hospital and inpatient physician Medicare claims for the years 2005-2009. Risk-adjusted regression analyses measured the association between hospitalization costs and processes presumed to prevent and/or remedy complications common to high-risk procedures.

RESULTS

After controlling for comorbidities, analysis identified associations between increased costs and use of multiple processes, including arterial lines (4-12% higher; P < 0.001) and pulmonary artery catheters (23-33% higher; P < 0.001). Epidural analgesia was not associated with higher costs. Consultations were associated with 24-44% (P < 0.001) higher costs, and total parenteral nutrition was associated with 13-31% higher costs (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Many frequently utilized processes and services presumed to avoid and/or ameliorate complications are associated with increased surgical oncology costs. This suggests that the patient-centered value of each process should be measured on a procedure-specific basis. Likewise, further attention should be focused on defining the efficacy of each of these costly, but frequently unproven, additions to perioperative care.

The influence of complications on the costs of complex cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

It is widely known that outcomes after cancer surgery vary widely, depending on interactions between patient, tumor, neoadjuvant therapy, and provider factors. Within this complex milieu, the influence of complications on the cost of surgical oncology care remains unknown. The authors examined rates of Patient Safety Indicator (PSI) occurrence for 6 cancer operations and their association with costs of care.

METHODS

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) PSI definitions were used to identify patient safety-related complications in Medicare claims data. Hospital and inpatient physician claims for the years 2005 through 2009 were analyzed for 6 cancer resections: colectomy, rectal resection, pulmonary lobectomy, pneumonectomy, esophagectomy, and pancreatic resection. Risk-adjusted regression analyses were used to measure the association between each PSI and hospitalization costs.

RESULTS

Overall PSI rates ranged from a low of 0.01% for postoperative hip fracture to a high of 2.58% for respiratory failure. Death among inpatients with serious treatable complications, postoperative respiratory failure, postoperative thromboembolism, and accidental puncture/laceration were >1% for all 6 cancer operations. Several PSIs-including decubitus ulcer, death among surgical inpatients with serious treatable complications, and postoperative thromboembolism-raised hospitalization costs by ≥20% for most cancer surgery types. Postoperative respiratory failure resulted in a cost increase >50% for all cancer resections.

CONCLUSIONS

The consistently higher costs associated with cancer surgery PSIs indicate that substantial health care savings could be achieved by targeting these indicators for quality improvement.

Modeling hospital infrastructure by optimizing quality, accessibility and efficiency via a mixed integer programming model

Background

The majority of curative health care is organized in hospitals. As in most other countries, the current 94 hospital locations in the Netherlands offer almost all treatments, ranging from rather basic to very complex care. Recent studies show that concentration of care can lead to substantial quality improvements for complex conditions and that dispersion of care for chronic conditions may increase quality of care. In previous studies on allocation of hospital infrastructure, the allocation is usually only based on accessibility and/or efficiency of hospital care. In this paper, we explore the possibilities to include a quality function in the objective function, to give global directions to how the ‘optimal’ hospital infrastructure would be in the Dutch context.

Methods

To create optimal societal value we have used a mathematical mixed integer programming (MIP) model that balances quality, efficiency and accessibility of care for 30 ICD-9 diagnosis groups. Typical aspects that are taken into account are the volume-outcome relationship, the maximum accepted travel times for diagnosis groups that may need emergency treatment and the minimum use of facilities.

Results

The optimal number of hospital locations per diagnosis group varies from 12-14 locations for diagnosis groups which have a strong volume-outcome relationship, such as neoplasms, to 150 locations for chronic diagnosis groups such as diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Conclusions

In conclusion, our study shows a new approach for allocating hospital infrastructure over a country or certain region that includes quality of care in relation to volume per provider that can be used in various countries or regions. In addition, our model shows that within the Dutch context chronic care may be too concentrated and complex and/or acute care may be too dispersed. Our approach can relatively easily be adopted towards other countries or regions and is very suitable to perform a ‘what-if’ analysis.

Volume-outcome relationship in neurotrauma care

Object

A positive correlation between outcomes and the volume of patients seen by a provider has been supported by numerous studies. Volume-outcome relationships (VORs) have been well documented in the setting of both neurosurgery and trauma care and have shaped regionalization policies to optimize patient outcomes. Several authors have also investigated the correlation between patient volume and cost of care, known as the volume-cost relationship (VCR), with mixed results. The purpose of the present study was to investigate VORs and VCRs in the treatment of common intracranial injuries by testing the hypotheses that outcomes suffer at small-volume centers and costs rise at large-volume centers.

Methods

The authors performed a cross-sectional cohort study of patients with neurological trauma using the 2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest nationally representative all-payer data set. Patients were identified using ICD-9 codes for subdural, subarachnoid, and extradural hemorrhage following injury. Transfers were excluded from the study. In the primary analysis the association between a facility's neurotrauma patient volume and patient survival was tested. Secondary analyses focused on the relationships between patient volume and discharge status as well as between patient volume and cost. Analyses were performed using logistic regression.

Results

In-hospital mortality in the overall cohort was 9.9%. In-hospital mortality was 14.9% in the group with the smallest volume of patients, that is, fewer than 6 cases annually. At facilities treating 6–11, 12–23, 24–59, and 60+ patients annually, mortality was 8.0%, 8.3%, 9.5%, and 10.0%, respectively. For these groups there was a significantly reduced risk of in-hospital mortality as compared with the group with fewer than 6 annual patients; the adjusted ORs (and corresponding 95% CIs) were 0.45 (0.29–0.68), 0.56 (0.38–0.81), 0.63 (0.44–0.90), and 0.59 (0.41–0.87), respectively. For these same groups (once again using < 6 cases/year as the reference), there were no statistically significant differences in either estimated actual cost or duration of hospital stay.

Conclusions

A VOR exists in the treatment of neurotrauma, and a meaningful threshold for significantly improved mortality is 6 cases per year. Emergency and interfacility transport policies based on this threshold might improve national outcomes. Cost of care does not differ significantly with patient volume.

Can Centralization of Cancer Surgery Improve Social Welfare?

The empirical association between high hospital procedure volume and lower mortality rates has led to recommendations for the centralization of complex surgical procedures. Yet redirecting patients to a select number of high-volume hospitals creates potential negative consequences for market competition. We use patient-level data to estimate the association between hospital procedure volume and patient mortality and costs. We also estimate the association between hospital market concentration and mortality, cost, and prices. We use our estimates to simulate the change in social welfare resulting from redirecting patients at low-volume hospitals to high-volume facilities. We find that a higher procedure volume leads to significant reductions in mortality for patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer, but not colon cancer. Procedure volume also influences costs for both surgeries, but in a nonlinear fashion. Increased market concentration is associated with higher costs and prices for colon cancer, but not pancreatic cancer patients. Simulations indicated that centralizing pancreatic cancer surgery is unambiguously welfare enhancing. In contrast, there is less evidence to suggest that centralizing colon cancer surgery would be welfare improving.

Case volume, quality of care, and care efficiency in coronary artery bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

How case volume and quality of care relate to hospital costs or length of stay (LOS) are important questions as we seek to improve the value of health care.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of patients 18 years or older who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in a network of US hospitals. Case volumes were estimated using our data set. Quality was assessed by whether recommended medications and services were not received in ideal patients, as well as the overall number of measures missed. We used multivariable hierarchical models to estimate the effects of case volume and quality on hospital cost and LOS.

RESULTS

The majority of hospitals (51%) and physicians (78%) were lowest-volume providers, and only 18% of patients received all quality of care measures. Median LOS was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR], 6-11 days), and median costs were $25 140 (IQR, $19 677-$33 121). In analyses adjusted for patient and site characteristics, lowest-volume hospitals had 19.8% higher costs (95% CI, 3.9%-38.0% higher); adjusting for care quality did not eliminate differences in costs. Low surgeon volume was also associated with higher costs, though less strongly (3.1% higher costs [95% CI, 0.6%-5.6% higher]). Individual quality measures had inconsistent associations with costs or LOS, but patients who had no quality measures missed had much shorter LOS and lower costs than those who missed even one.

CONCLUSION

Avoiding lowest-volume hospitals and maximizing quality are separate approaches to improving health care efficiency through reducing costs of coronary bypass surgery.

Pro/con debate: do the benefits of regionalized critical care delivery outweigh the risks of interfacility patient transport?

You are providing input in planning for critical care services to a large regional health authority. You are considering concentrating some critical care services into high-volume regional centres of excellence, as has been done in other fields of medicine. In your region, this would require several centres with differing levels of expertise that are geographically separated. Given there are inherent risks and time delays associated with interfacility patient transport, you debate whether these potential risks outweigh the benefits of regional centres of excellence.

Certificate of Need (CON) for cardiac care: controversy over the contributions of CON

OBJECTIVES

To test whether state Certificate of Need (CON) regulations influence procedural mortality or the provision of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).

DATA SOURCES

Medicare inpatient claims obtained for 1989-2002 for patients age 65+ who received CABG or PCI.

STUDY DESIGN

We used differences-in-differences regression analysis to compare states that dropped CON during the sample period with states that kept the regulations. We examined procedural mortality, the number of hospitals in the state performing CABG or PCI, mean hospital volume, and statewide procedure volume for CABG and PCI.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

States that dropped CON experienced lower CABG mortality rates relative to states that kept CON, although the differential is not permanent. No such mortality difference is found for PCI. Dropping CON is associated with more providers statewide and lower mean hospital volume for both CABG and PCI. However, statewide procedure counts remain the same.

CONCLUSIONS

We find no evidence that CON regulations are associated with higher quality CABG or PCI. Future research should examine whether the greater number of hospitals performing revascularization after CON removal raises expenditures due to the building of more facilities, or lowers expenditures due to enhanced price competition.

Assessing changes in high-volume hospital use: hospitals, payers, and aggregate volume trends

The relationship between higher procedure volumes and medical outcomes has generated recommendations for greater use of high-volume hospitals, with research and advocacy on this issue intensifying during the 1990s. Despite this interest, the trends presented here showed only limited changes between 1995 and 2002. For a number of services, less than half of patients received care at high-volume hospitals, and for several services, there was a surprising decline in the proportion at high-volume hospitals. Trends in the rate of high-volume hospital use appeared to be associated with trends in aggregate volume, at the same time that there were only modest changes in either patient use of high-volume hospitals or the number of hospitals offering these services. These trends suggested the importance of research on factors that affect patient choices, hospital decisions, and payer incentives concerning hospital use, especially in the context of declining aggregate procedure volumes.