Understanding Value-based Reimbursement Models and Trends in Orthopaedic Health Policy: An Introduction to the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015

The association of ASA score and outcomes following total ankle arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

This study seeks to evaluate the relationship between American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score and postoperative outcomes following TAA.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried from 2007 to 2020 to identify 2210 TAA patients. Patients were stratified into low (n = 1328; healthy/mild systemic disease) or high (n = 881; severe/life-threatening systemic disease) ASA score cohorts.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in complications, readmission, or reoperation rate based on ASA score. Increased ASA score was significantly associated with longer length of stay (low = 1.69 days, high = 1.98 days; p < .001) and higher rate of adverse discharge (low = 95.3 %, high = 87.4 %; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Higher ASA scores (3 and 4) were statically significantly associated with increased length of stay and non-home discharge disposition. These findings are valuable for physicians and patients to consider prior to TAA given the increased utilization of resources and cost associated with higher ASA scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

Establishing the Patient Acceptable Symptom State in a Nonshoulder Hand and Upper Extremity Population for the QuickDASH and PROMIS UE Computer Adaptive Tests

PURPOSE

It is unclear what score thresholds on patient-reported outcomes instruments reflect an acceptable level of upper extremity (UE) function from the perspective of patients undergoing hand surgery. The purpose of this study was to calculate the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) UE Computer Adaptive Test (CAT), version 2.0, in a population who underwent hand surgery.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent hand surgery between February 2019 and December 2019 at a single academic tertiary institution were identified. QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT version 2.0 scores were collected 1 year after surgery, as were separate symptom- and function-specific anchor questions that queried the acceptability of patients' current state. Threshold values predictive of a patient reporting an acceptable symptom state (PASS[+]) were calculated for both instruments using the 75th percentile score for patients in the PASS(+) group and the Youden Index as determined by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 222 patients were included. QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT scores differed significantly between the PASS(+) and PASS(-) groups. The 75th percentile method yielded PASS values of <16 for the QuickDASH and >43 for the PROMIS UE CAT for both anchor questions. The ROC analysis yielded PASS estimates of <15.9 to <20.5 for the QuickDASH and >38.1 to >46.2 for the PROMIS UE CAT, with ranges calculated from differing threshold values for each of the 2 anchor questions. The ROC-based estimates demonstrated high levels of model discrimination (area under the curve ≥ 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

We propose PASS estimates obtained using the 75th percentile and ROC methods.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Specifically, PASS values in the range of 15.9-20.5 for the QuickDASH and 38.1-46.2 for the PROMIS UE CAT version 2.0 should be used when interpreting outcomes at a population level.

Inconsistent Classification of "Outpatient" Surgeries Leads to Different Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty in Medicare Beneficiaries: A Critical Analysis

BACKGROUND

With rising utilization of outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) in older patients including Medicare beneficiaries, the objective was to compare differences in definition including (1) patient demographics; (2) lengths of stay (LOS); and (3) outcomes of "outpatient" (stated status) versus "same-day discharge" (SDD) (actual LOS = 0 days) utilizing a nationwide database.

METHODS

A national database from 2015 to 2019 was queried for Medicare-aged patients undergoing outpatient THA. Total outpatient THAs (N = 6,072) were defined in one of 2 ways: either "outpatient" by the hospital (N = 2,003) or LOS = 0 days (N = 4,069). Demographics, LOS, discharge destinations, and complications were compared between groups. Logistic regression models computed odds ratios (ORs) for factors leading to complications, readmissions, and nonhome discharges. P values < .008 were significant.

RESULTS

Women (OR: 1.19, P = .002), diabetes mellitus (OR: 1.31, P = .003), general anesthesia (OR: 1.24, P = .001), and longer operative times (≥95 minutes) (OR: 1.82, P < .001) were associated with 'outpatient' designation versus SDD. Within the hospital-defined 'outpatient' cohort, 49.1% (983 of 2,003) were discharged the same day (LOS = 0 days), and 21.8% had LOS 2 or more days. The hospital-defined 'outpatient' cohort had greater odds of nonhome discharges (6.3 versus 2.8%; OR: 1.88, P < .001) compared to SDD surgeries. The incidence was higher for any complication among hospital-defined 'outpatient' designated patients compared to SDD (5.5 versus 3.9%, P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient surgeries may be misleading and often do not correlate with SDD, as over 20% remain in the hospital 2 or more days. Investigators should quantitatively define the "outpatient" status by actual LOS to allow standardization and results comparison.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Physician Professional Fees Are Declining and Inpatient and Outpatient Facility Fees Are Increasing for Orthopaedic Procedures in the United States

PURPOSE

To examine the trends in physician professional fees and inpatient and outpatient facility fees in orthopaedic surgery in the United States.

METHODS

Physician professional fees and inpatient and outpatient facility fees were tracked from 2008 to 2021 for the most common orthopaedic procedures in each orthopaedic subspecialty. Using common procedure codes for physician and outpatient procedures and Medicare severity diagnosis related group codes for inpatient procedures, the Medicare Physician Fee Schedules were used to obtain the national payment amounts for physician professional fees and inpatient and outpatient facility fees. Trends in fees were tracked over time after adjustment for inflation.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2021, physician professional fees decreased by an average of 20%, whereas inpatient facility fees increased by 15%, and outpatient facility fees increased by 72%. The orthopaedic subspecialty with the largest decrease in physician professional fees was oncology, with an average decrease of 23.5%, followed by general orthopaedics (23.1%), and sports medicine (22.8%). The largest increase in outpatient facility fees was seen in the subspecialties of general orthopaedics (149.8%), spine (130.1%), and trauma (123.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 13 years, physician professional fees for the most common orthopaedic procedures have declined while inpatient and outpatient facility fees have increased. Understanding these changes is important to the practice of orthopaedic surgery in the United States.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, economic.

Industry payments to spine surgeons from 2014 to 2019: trends and comparison of payments to spine surgeons versus all physicians

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The ethics of industry payments to physicians and the potential impact on healthcare costs and research outcomes have long been topics of debate. Industry payments to spine surgeons are frequently scrutinized. Transparency of industry relationships with physicians provides insight into their possible impact on clinical decision-making and utilization of care.

PURPOSE

To analyze trends in medical industry payments to spine surgeons and all physicians from 2014 to 2019, and further evaluate whether specific payments to spine surgeons vary based on company size.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Cross-sectional investigation of publicly reported Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments Database (OPD) POPULATION SAMPLE: All US providers listed as receiving industry payments with further evaluation of payments to neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine surgeons.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Main measures were the magnitude and trends of industry general and research payments and subcategories of general payments, such as royalty/license and consulting fees, to spine surgeons and comparison to all physicians over the six-year period. Variations in payment patterns among spine device manufacturers with the highest reported level of spine surgeon payments in 2019.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2019 publicly reported general and research industry payments in the CMS OPD were analyzed. Trends in payments to all physicians were compared to trends in payments to neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine surgeons. Trends in payment patterns among spine device manufacturers with the highest payments in 2019 were determined. Linear regression analysis was completed to find statistically significant outcomes.

RESULTS

Our investigation found an aggregate of $42,710,365,196 general and research payments reported to all physicians over the 6-year period, 2.6% ($1,112,936,203) of which went to spine surgeons. Industry general and research payments to spine surgeons decreased by 17.5% ($195,571,109, 2014; $161,283,683, 2019), while increasing by 8.7% ($6,706,208,391, 2014; $7,288,003,832, 2019) to all physicians. Industry research payments to spine surgeons were notably low each year and decreased to only 0.5% of research payments made to all physicians in 2019. Median payment received by spine surgeons as well as the overall distribution of payments to the 75th and 95th percentile significantly increased over the six-year period in comparison to the stable distribution of payments to all physicians. Top eight spine device manufactures with the highest level of spine surgeon payments accounted for 72.9% payments in 2014 but decreased payments by 17.6% to 2019 ($120,409,083.75, 2014; $99,283,264.49, 2019).

CONCLUSIONS

Industry general and research payments to all physicians increased from 2014 to 2019 but decreased to spine surgeons, largely due to decreasing payments from eight device manufacturers with the highest level of surgeon payments. A small subset of spine surgeons continues to receive increasing payments. The implications of decreasing investments in research by industry and of large payments made to a small group of spine surgeons bears cautious oversight, both for the future of the specialty and any impact on patient care outcomes.

Between 2000 and 2020, Reimbursement for Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgery Decreased by 30%

Purpose

To examine and analyze Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2020 for orthopaedic foot and ankle procedures.

Methods

The 20 most used orthopaedic foot and ankle surgical procedures were gathered from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services website using the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File 2017. The reimbursement data for each code were gathered from The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The reimbursement values were adjusted for inflation to 2020 U.S. dollars using the consumer price index.

Results

The average inflation-adjusted reimbursement for included procedures decreased by 30% from 2000 to 2020. The greatest mean decreases were observed for “correction of hallux valgus” (–47%) and “partial excision of foot bone” (–41%). The procedures with the smallest mean decreases were observed in “treatment of “Amputation of toe” (–19%) and “closed treatment of metatarsal fracture” (–7%).

Conclusions

From 2000 to 2020, Inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for foot and ankle surgery decreased by 30%.

Level of Evidence

IV; economic analysis.

Inflation-Adjusted Medicare Reimbursement Has Decreased for Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Procedures: Analysis From 2000 to 2020

Background:

Decreases in Medicare reimbursement have been noted among many medical specialties. An in-depth analysis of the subspecialty of orthopaedic sports medicine is needed to determine changes in Medicare reimbursement in this field.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose was to elucidate the trends in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures between 2000 and 2020. It was hypothesized that Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially during the study period.

Study Design:

Economic decision and analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to extract Medicare reimbursement information between 2000 and 2020 for 67 procedures related to orthopaedic sports medicine. These values were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was calculated to measure the annual rate of change, and descriptive analyses were performed using the Student t test.

Results:

Between 2000 and 2020, inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement for the 67 included procedures decreased by an average of 33% (CAGR = –2.2%; R 2 = 0.78). Reimbursement decreased for procedures related to the shoulder and elbow by 34% (CAGR = –2.3%; R 2 = 0.80), for hip-related procedures by 23% (CAGR = –1.4%; R 2 = 0.77), for knee-related procedures by 31% (CAGR = –2.0%; R 2 = 0.81), and for procedures relating to the foot and ankle by 38% (CAGR = –2.5%; R 2 = 0.79).

Conclusion:

Study findings indicated that inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement decreased substantially between 2000 and 2020 for orthopaedic sports medicine procedures, ranging from a 23% decrease for hip-related procedures to a 38% decrease for foot and ankle–related procedures. The results of this study could be used to provide further context for health care policy decisions and help ensure sustainable financial environments for orthopaedic sports medicine surgeon.

How Did Orthopaedic Surgeons Perform in the 2018 Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System?

BACKGROUND

The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the latest value-based payment program implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. As performance-based bonuses and penalties continue to rise in magnitude, it is essential to evaluate this program's ability to achieve its core objectives of quality improvement, cost reduction, and competition around clinically meaningful outcomes.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked the following: (1) How do orthopaedic surgeons differ on the MIPS compared with surgeons in other specialties, both in terms of the MIPS scores and bonuses that derive from them? (2) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving penalties based on the MIPS? (3) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving a perfect score of 100 based on the MIPS?

METHODS

Scores from the 2018 MIPS reporting period were linked to physician demographic and practice-based information using the Medicare Part B Provider Utilization and Payment File, the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System Data (NPPES), and National Physician Compare Database. For all orthopaedic surgeons identified within the Physician Compare Database, there were 15,210 MIPS scores identified, representing a 72% (15,210 of 21,124) participation rate in the 2018 MIPS. Those participating in the MIPS receive a final score (0 to 100, with 100 being a perfect score) based on a weighted calculation of performance metrics across four domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and costs. In 2018, orthopaedic surgeons had an overall mean ± SD score of 87 ± 21. From these scores, payment adjustments are determined in the following manner: scores less than 15 received a maximum penalty adjustment of -5% ("penalty"), scores equal to 15 did not receive an adjustment ("neutral"), scores between 15 and 70 received a positive adjustment ("positive"), and scores above 70 (maximum 100) received both a positive adjustment and an additional exceptional performance adjustment with a maximum adjustment of +5% ("bonus"). Adjustments among orthopaedic surgeons were compared across various demographic and practice characteristics. Both the mean MIPS score and the resulting payment adjustments were compared with a group of surgeons in other subspecialties. Finally, multivariable logistic regression models were generated to identify which variables were associated with increased odds of receiving a penalty as well as a perfect score of 100.

RESULTS

Compared with surgeons in other specialties, orthopaedic surgeons' mean MIPS score was 4.8 (95% CI 4.3 to 5.2; p < 0.001) points lower. From this difference, a lower proportion of orthopaedic surgeons received bonuses (-5.0% [95% CI -5.6 to -4.3]; p < 0.001), and a greater proportion received penalties (+0.5% [95% CI 0.2 to 0.8]; p < 0.001) and positive adjustments (+4.6% [95% CI 6.1 to 10.7]; p < 0.001) compared with surgeons in other specialties. After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as gender, years in practice, and practice setting, small (1 to 49 members) group size (adjusted odds ratio 22.2 [95% CI 8.17 to 60.3]; p < 0.001) and higher Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) scores (aOR 2.32 [95% CI 1.35 to 4.01]; p = 0.002) were associated with increased odds of a penalty. Also, after controlling for potential confounding, we found that reporting through an alternative payment model (aOR 28.7 [95% CI 24.0 to 34.3]; p < 0.001) was associated with increased odds of a perfect score, whereas small practice size (1 to 49 members) (aOR 0.35 [95% CI 0.31 to 0.39]; p < 0.001), a high patient volume (greater than 500 Medicare patients) (aOR 0.82 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.95]; p = 0.01), and higher HCC score (aOR 0.79 [95% Cl 0.66 to 0.93]; p = 0.006) were associated with decreased odds of a perfect MIPS score.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, orthopaedic surgeons performed well in the second year of the MIPS, with 87% earning bonus payments. Among participating orthopaedic surgeons, individual reporting affiliation, small practice size, and more medically complex patient populations were associated with higher odds of receiving penalties and lower odds of earning a perfect score. Based on these findings, we recommend that individuals and orthopaedic surgeons in small group practices strive to forge partnerships with larger hospital practices with adequate ancillary staff to support quality reporting initiatives. Such partnerships may help relieve surgeons of growing administrative obligations and allow for maintained focus on direct patient care activities. Policymakers should aim to produce a shortened panel of performance measures to ensure more standardized comparison and less time and energy diverted from established clinical workflows. The current MIPS scoring methodology should also be amended with a complexity modifier to ensure fair evaluation of surgeons practicing in the safety net setting, or those treating patients with a high comorbidity burden.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Temporal and Geographic Trends in Medicare Reimbursement of Primary and Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty: 2000 to 2020

INTRODUCTION

A comprehensive understanding of the trends for financial reimbursement of shoulder arthroplasty is important as progress is made toward achieving sustainable payment models in orthopaedics. This study analyzes Medicare reimbursement trends for shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesize that Medicare reimbursement has decreased for shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2020 and that revision procedures have experienced greater decreases in reimbursement.

METHODS

The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was queried for each Current Procedural Terminology code used in shoulder arthroplasty, and physician reimbursement data were extracted. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2020 US dollars. Both the average annual and the total percentage change in surgeon reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends for all included procedures. Mean percentage change in adjusted reimbursement among primary procedures in comparison to revision procedures was calculated. The mean reimbursement was assessed and visually represented by geographic state.

RESULTS

The average reimbursement for all shoulder arthroplasty procedures decreased by 35.5% from 2000 to 2020. Revision total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) experienced the greatest mean decrease (-44.6%), whereas primary TSA (-23.9%) experienced the smallest mean decrease. The adjusted reimbursement rate for all included procedures decreased by an average of 1.8% each year. The mean reimbursement for revision procedures decreased more than the mean reimbursement for primary procedures (-41.1% for revision, -29.9% for primary; P < 0.001). The mean reimbursement for TSA in 2020, and the percent change in reimbursement from 2000 to 2020, varied by state.

DISCUSSION

Medicare reimbursement for shoulder arthroplasty procedures has decreased from 2000 to 2020, with revision procedures experiencing the greatest decrease. Increased awareness and consideration of these trends will be important as healthcare reform evolves, and reimbursements for large joint arthroplasty are routinely adjusted.

Orthopaedic Group Practice Size Is Increasing

PURPOSE

To analyze recent trends in orthopaedic surgery consolidation and quantify these changes temporally and geographically from 2012 to 2020.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of orthopaedic surgeon practice size in the United States using 2012 and 2020 data obtained from the Physician Compare database.

RESULTS

Although we observed an increase from 21,216 unique orthopaedic surgeons in 2012 to 21,553 in 2020 (1.6% increase), the number of practices experienced a large decrease from 7,299 practices in 2012 to 5,829 in 2020 (20.1% decrease). The proportion of orthopaedic surgeons working in solo practices decreased from 13.2% (2,790) in 2012 to 7.4% (1,595) in 2020, and the proportion of orthopaedic surgeons working in groups sized 2 to 24 decreased from 35.3% (7,482) in 2012 to 22.2% (4,775) in 2020. In contrast, groups sized 25 to 99 have grown from 20.7% (4,387) of all orthopaedic surgeons to 23.4% (5,048) in 2020. Groups sized 100 to 499 have increased from 16.9% (3,593) in 2012 to 24.1% (5,190) in 2020, whereas groups sized 500 or greater have grown from 14% (2,964) in 2012 to 22.9% (4,945) in 2020. The number of unique group practices showed a significant decrease in the number of solo groups, which comprised 43.8% (3,200) of the total number of individual practices in 2012, decreasing to 32% (1,886) in 2020. All other groups increased in number and proportionally from 2012 to 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that over the period from 2012 to 2020, there has been a substantial trend of orthopaedic surgeons shifting to increasing practice sizes, potentially indicating that more orthopaedic surgeons are working for large health care organizations rather than small independent practices.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The impact of these changes should be examined to determine large-scale effects on patient care, payment models, access, and outcomes, along with physician compensation, lifestyle, and satisfaction.

Accountable Operating Room Teams

With Medicare reimbursement diminishing and the aging population consuming more health care, hospitals continue to push for reforms to improve the efficiency of health care delivery, decrease consumption, and elevate the quality of care. Operating rooms command a large share of hospital resources but are also major revenue generators. Surgical care has evolved to become more efficient and accountable. Defining the characteristics of an accountable operating room team has been more elusive and inconsistent. This review defines the characteristics of accountable operating room teams and recommends measures by which to evaluate them. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(4):e463-e470.].

A Comprehensive Primer for Quality Assessment in Orthopaedic Surgery: Quality Measures, Payment Programs, and Registries

Practicing orthopaedic surgeons are subject to both the requirement and the opportunity to participate in individual or group quality assessment, quality-based payment programs, and clinical data registries. An important limitation to participating in and receiving the benefits of quality measuring activities and programs is the lack of a current resource outlining quality assessment models, current quality metrics, and the presence and function of current quality programs, payment models, and active orthopaedic registries. This article is intended as a primer for the practicing orthopaedic surgeon and orthopaedic groups. We provide a detailed overview of current quality metric databases, their categorization and use, and orthopaedic surgeon's role in creating and shaping the definition of quality care and outcomes assessment in the future.

Discharge to a Non-Home Destination Following Total Ankle Arthroplasty (TAA): An Analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Database

Despite an increasing trend in the number of total ankle arthroplasties (TAAs) being done globally, current evidence remains limited with regards to factors influencing a non-home discharge to a facility following the procedure. The 2012-2016 American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried using Current Procedural Terminology code 27702 for patients undergoing TAA. Discharge to a destination was categorized into home and non-home. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression models were used to evaluate independent risk factors associated with non-home discharge disposition. As a secondary objective, we also evaluated risk factors associated with a prolonged length of stay (LOS) >2 days. A total of 722 TAAs were retrieved for final analysis. A total of 68 (9.4%) patients experienced a non-home discharge following the surgery. Independent factors for a non-home discharge were a LOS >2 days (odds ratio [OR] 10.51), age ≥65 years (OR 4.52), female (OR 2.90), hypertension (OR 2.63), and American Society of Anesthesiologists >II (OR 2.01). A total of 174 (24.1%) patients stayed in the hospital for more than 2 days. Significant risk factors for LOS >2 days were age ≥65 years (OR 1.62), female (OR 1.53), operative time >150 minutes (OR 1.91), and an inpatient admission status (OR 4.74). With limited literature revolving around outcomes following TAA, the current study identifies significant predictors associated with a non-home discharge. Providers should consider preoperatively risk-stratifying and expediting discharge in these patients to reduce the costs associated with a prolonged hospital length of stay.

Disagreement in Readmission Rates After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Across Data Sets

Background

In 2014, the Affordable Care Act Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program began penalizing hospitals for excessive readmission rates 30 days after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Various data sets with nonstandardized validation processes report readmission data, which may provide conflicting outcome values for the same patient populations.

Methods

We queried 4 separate data sets: the American Joint Replacement Registry, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services billing data, the Vizient data set, and an advanced analytics integration (Cognos) report from our electronic medical record. We identified 2763 patients who underwent primary TKA and THA at a single academic medical center from June 2016 to June 2019. We then matched 613 surgery encounters in all 4 databases. Our primary outcome metric was 30-day readmissions. Fleiss’ Kappa was used to measure agreement among the different data sets.

Results

Of the 613 THA and TKA patients, there were 45 (7.3%) readmissions noted. Data collected from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services flagged 41 (6.7%) readmissions, Vizient flagged 11 (1.8%) readmissions, and the American Joint Replacement Registry and Cognos report both flagged 6 (0.98%) readmissions each. None of the readmissions were identified by all 4 data sets. There was significant disagreement among data sets using Fleiss’ Kappa (kappa = -0.1318, P = .03).

Conclusion

There is disagreement in readmission rates in databases receiving the same patient data after THA and TKA. Care must be taken to establish standard validation processes and reporting methods and scrutiny applied when interpreting readmission rates from various data sets.

The impact of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities on patient outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty

AIMS

To investigate the impact of the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices on patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) following shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), or hemiarthroplasty (HA) from 2016 to 2018 were identified, along with the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities listed as their secondary diagnoses in the electronic medical records. Patients were matched to our institution's registry to obtain their PROMs, including shoulder-specific (American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) and Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS)) and general health scales (12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference). Linear regression models adjusting for age and sex were used to evaluate the association between increasing number of comorbidities and PROM scores. A total of 1,817 shoulder arthroplasties were performed: 1,017 (56%) TSA, 726 (40%) RSA, and 74 (4%) HA. The mean age was 67 years (SD 10), and 936 (52%) of the patients were female.

RESULTS

The most common comorbidities were obesity (1,256, 69%) and hypertension (990, 55%). Patients with more comorbidities had lower ASES and SAS scores at baseline (p < 0.001). Elixhauser comorbidities continued to negatively impact ASES and SAS scores at one year (p = 0.002) and two-year follow-up (p = 0.002). Patients with more comorbidities reported greater pain interference on PROMIS at baseline (p = 0.007), but not at two years. Higher number of Charlson comorbidities were associated with lower scores on the SF-12 mental component at baseline (p < 0.001) and two years (p = 0.020). Higher number of Elixhauser comorbidities were associated with lower SF-12 physical component scores at baseline (p < 0.001) and two years (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Higher number of comorbidities was associated with lower baseline scores and worse outcomes on both shoulder-specific and general health PROMs. The presence of specific comorbidities may be used during shared decision-making to manage expectations for patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):964-970.

Establishing clinically significant outcome thresholds for the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation 2 years following total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) is a simple, time-efficient patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) used to assess postoperative shoulder function. Clinically significant outcome values and ability to correlate with longer legacy PROM scores at 2 years following shoulder arthroplasty are unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed using SANE, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), and Constant scores that were collected at a minimum 2-year follow-up. A total of 153 patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) were included. A distribution-based method was used to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). An anchor-based method was used to determine substantial clinical benefit (SCB). The following anchor question was collected alongside the PROMs and graded on a 15-point Likert-type scale to establish the SCB: "Since your surgery, has there been any change in the pain in your shoulder?" Linear regression was used to assess correlations between PROMs.

RESULTS

SANE showed moderate correlation with ASES (R² = 0.493) and Constant (R² = 0.586) scores (P < .001). The MCID value was 14.9, and the SCB absolute value was 80.4 (area under the curve = 0.663) for SANE. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that patients undergoing RTSA were less likely to achieve SCB on all 3 outcome measures (P < .02).

CONCLUSIONS

This study establishes concurrent construct validity for SANE and suggests that it is a valid metric to assess the MCID and SCB at 2 years following anatomic TSA and RTSA. SANE demonstrated moderate correlations with ASES and Constant scores. Patients undergoing RTSA demonstrated a lower propensity to achieve SCB at 2 years postoperatively compared with anatomic TSA.

Increasing severity of anemia is associated with poorer 30-day outcomes for total shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has increased in utilization over the past several decades. Anemia is a common preoperative condition among patients undergoing TSA and has been associated with poorer outcomes in other surgical procedures. To the best of our knowledge, no study has analyzed the association between anemia severity and TSA outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the effects that increasing severity of anemia may have on the postoperative outcomes in patients receiving primary TSA.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Project database from the years 2015 to 2018. Current Procedure Terminology code 23472 was used to identify all primary TSA procedures recorded during this time frame. Patients with greater than 38% preoperative hematocrit (HCT) were classified as having normal HCT levels. Patients with HCT values between 33% and 38% were classified as having mild anemia. All patients with less than 33% HCT were classified as having moderate/severe anemia. Patient demographic information, preoperative risk factors, and postoperative outcomes were compared among the 3 cohorts. A multivariate logistic regression including demographic factors and comorbidities was performed to determine whether increasing severity of anemia is independently associated with poorer postoperative outcomes.

Results

Of the 15,185 patients included in this study, 11,404 had normal HCT levels, 2962 patients were mildly anemic, and 819 patients had moderate to severe anemia. With increasing severity of anemia, there was an increased average hospital length of stay (1.6 vs. 2.1 vs. 3.0 days, P < .001), rate of readmissions (2.3% vs. 4.8% vs. 7.0%, P < .001), and rate of all reoperations (1.1% vs. 1.8% vs. 3.1%, P < .001). There was a statistically significant increase in both minor (1.9% vs. 2.7% vs. 4.4%, P < .001) and major (1.2% vs. 2.4% vs. 4.3%, P < .001) postoperative complication rates as well. Multivariate analysis identified anemia as an independent predictor of readmissions, reoperations, minor complications, and major complications.

Conclusion

We found increasing severity of anemia to be associated with progressively worse 30-day postoperative outcomes. This is consistent with the outcomes found for increasing severity of anemia in patients receiving other total joint procedures. Using preoperative HCT levels may be a useful tool for predicting the risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing TSA. This information could be used to further optimize patient selection for primary TSA.

Variations in Patient Satisfaction Scores Between HCAHPS and a Novel Orthopedic Practice-Specific Survey

Performance on the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey can affect up to 33% of a physician's reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. At this pseudo-private orthopedic practice, the authors characterized how physicians often achieve drastically different scores between HCAHPS and an Internal Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (IPSQ). Eighteen physicians were ranked separately according to percentage of top-box scores on HCAHPS and IPSQ. There was an inverse relationship between physician rank for the 2 surveys according to Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ = -0.36, P = .15). Qualitative subanalysis indicated that although "physician interaction" was the most common reason for negative comments on HCAHPS, "ancillary staff" and "workflow" concerns were common on IPSQ. The outpatient setting remains a critical component in achieving high-quality orthopedic care. Consequently, HCAHPS alone may not be a sufficient indicator of patient satisfaction for orthopedic and other subspecialty practices.

Risk Factors for Discharge to a Non-Home Destination and Reoperation Following Outpatient Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) in Medicare-Eligible Patients

Introduction:

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services removed total hip arthroplasty (THA) from the inpatient-only (IO) list in January 2020. Given this recommendation, we analyzed Medicare-eligible patients undergoing outpatient THA to understand risk factors for nonroutine discharge, reoperations, and readmissions.

Materials and Methods:

The 2015-2018 American College of Surgeons–National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried using Current Procedural Terminology code 27130 for Medicare eligible patients (≥ 65 years of age) undergoing outpatient THA. Postoperative discharge destination was categorized into home and non-home. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate risk factors associated with non-home discharge disposition. Secondarily, we evaluated rates and risk factors associated with 30-day reoperations and readmissions.

Results:

A total of 1095 THAs were retrieved for final analysis. A total of 108 patients (9.9%) experienced a non-home discharge postoperatively. Patients were discharged to rehab (n = 47; 4.3%), a skilled care facility (n = 47; 4.3%), a facility that was “home” (n = 8; 0.7%), a separate acute care facility (n = 5; 0.5%), or an unskilled facility (n = 1; 0.1%). Independent factors for a non-home discharge were American Society of Anesthesiologists Class >II (odds ratio [OR] 2.74), operative time >80 minutes (OR 2.42), age >70 years (OR 2.20), and female gender (OR 1.67). Eighteen patients (1.6%) required an unplanned reoperation within 30 days. A total of 40 patients (3.7%) required 30-day readmissions, with 35 readmissions related to the original THA procedure. Independent risk factors for 30-day reoperation were COPD (OR 5.85) and HTN (OR 5.24). Independent risk factors for 30-day readmission were HTN (OR 4.35) and Age >70 (OR 2.48).

Discussion:

The current study identifies significant predictors associated with a non-home discharge, reoperation, and readmission in Medicare-aged patients undergoing outpatient THA.

Conclusion:

Providers should consider preoperatively risk-stratifying patients to reduce the costs associated with unplanned discharge destination, complication or reoperation.

Impact of a Clinical Documentation Integrity Program on Severity of Illness of Expired Patients

BACKGROUND

As payment models continue to move toward value-driven care, the quality of documentation has become more important than ever. Clinical Documentation Integrity (CDI) programs can aid in the documentation of diagnoses that are specific and consistent throughout the medical record, which leads to accurate code assignment, better understanding of patient complexity, and improved facility reimbursement.

METHODS

An interrupted time series analysis was conducted by using a segmented regression model to estimate the impact of our hospital's CDI program on perceived patient complexity using severity of illness stratification, observed to expected mortality ratio and case-mix index. Patients who died during the admission were chosen to limit our analysis to patients with the highest severity of illness.

RESULTS

A total of 206 patients who had died while inpatient at our 400 bed children's hospital were included. There was a 15.7% increase in patients who were final coded with the highest level of severity of illness after our CDI program launched compared with those patients admitted before program inception. The hospital case-mix index for inpatient cases increased 25% from 2011 to 2017. There was a 44% decrease in the observed to expected mortality ratio.

DISCUSSION

A CDI program can have a significant impact, as evidenced by our ability to show complexity gains on some of the sickest patients by supporting documentation of precise, accurate diagnoses. In turn, this may allow for better understanding of the complexity of our patient population and support appropriate reimbursement and payer contract negotiations.

Time Required to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has focused on correlating statistically significant changes in outcome measures with clinically significant outcomes (CSOs). CSO benchmarks are being established for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR), but more remains to be defined about them.

PURPOSE

To define the time-dependent nature of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) after RCR and to define what factors affect this time to CSO achievement.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

An institutional registry was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between 2014 and 2016 and completed preoperative, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Threshold values for MCID, SCB, and PASS were obtained from previous literature for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and subjective Constant score. The time in which patients achieved MCID, SCB, and PASS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. A Cox multivariate regression model was used to identify variables correlated with earlier or later achievement of CSOs.

RESULTS

A total of 203 patients with an average age of 56.19 ± 9.96 years and average body mass index was 30.29 ± 6.49 were included. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for ASES was 5.77 ± 1.79 months, 6.22 ± 2.85 months, and 7.23 ± 3.81 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for SANE was 6.25 ± 2.42 months, 7.05 ± 4.10 months, and 9.26 ± 5.89 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for Constant was 6.94 ± 3.85 months, 7.13 ± 4.13 months, and 8.66 ± 5.46 months, respectively. Patients with dominant-sided surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 1.363; 95% CI, 1.065-1.745; P = .014) achieved CSOs earlier on ASES, while patients with workers' compensation status (HR, 0.752; 95% CI, 0.592-0.955; P = .019), who were current smokers (HR, 0.323; 95% CI, 0.119-0.882; P = .028), and with concomitant biceps tenodesis (HR, 0.763; 95% CI, 0.607-0.959; P = .021) achieved CSOs on ASES at later timepoints. Patients with distal clavicle excision (HR, 1.484; 95% CI, 1.028-2.143; P = .035) achieved CSOs earlier on SANE. Patients with distal clavicle excision (HR, 1.689; 95% CI, 1.183-2.411, P = .004) achieved CSOs earlier on Constant, while patients with workers' compensation insurance status (HR, 0.671; 95% CI, 0.506-0.891; P = .006) and partial-thickness tears (HR, 0.410; 95% CI, 0.250-0.671; P < .001) achieved CSOs later on Constant. Greater preoperative score was associated with delayed achievement of CSOs for ASES, SANE (HR, 0.993; 95% CI, 0.987-0.999; P = .020), and Constant (HR, 0.941; 95% CI, 0.928-0.962; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A majority of patients achieved MCID by 6 months after surgery. Dominant-sided surgery and concomitant distal clavicle excision resulted in faster CSO achievement, while workers' compensation status, concomitant biceps tenodesis, current smoking, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, and higher preoperative PROMs resulted in delayed CSO achievement.

Fate of the Morbidly Obese Patient Who Is Denied Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to investigate outcomes of patients denied total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA) due to morbid obesity.

METHODS

We performed an observational study of patients denied arthroplasty due to morbid obesity. A survey including the Harris Hip Score or pain and function components of the original Knee Society Score (KSS) was conducted with minimum 2-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed with parametric testing with significance at P < .05.

RESULTS

In total, 125 (4.4%) of 2819 patients were denied THA or TKA due to morbid obesity. Twenty-four (19.2%) met target weight and underwent arthroplasty at our institution. Of the remaining 101 (80.8%) patients, 33 (32.7%) agreed to participate in the survey. None received THA and 6 received TKA elsewhere above target body mass index. Harris Hip Score was significantly higher in the successful weight loss cohort at our institution (70.5 ± 13.4 vs 34.6 ± 13.1). KSS Pain (maximum score of 50) and Function (maximum score of 100) were significantly higher in the successful weight loss cohort at our institution (32.9 ± 16.5; 51.1 ± 19.5) compared to the denied nonoperative cohort (7.2 ± 11.5; 33.0 ± 23.1); however, only KSS Pain was higher when compared to the TKA elsewhere cohort (14.2 ± 18.0; 29.2 ± 38.7). KSS Pain and Function were similar for both denial cohorts regardless of undergoing arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

Nearly 80% of patients denied never met target weight for arthroplasty. Those who met target weight prior to arthroplasty often reported better outcomes. Outcomes were similar when target weight was not met regardless of undergoing arthroplasty.

Clinical Documentation for Intensivists: The Impact of Diagnosis Documentation

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to describe the interaction of clinical documentation with patient care, measures of patient acuity, quality metrics, research database accuracy, and healthcare reimbursement in order to highlight potential areas of improvement for intensivists.

DATA SOURCES

An online search of PubMed was undertaken as well as review of resources published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American Medical Association, and the Association of Clinical Documentation Improvement Specialists.

STUDY SELECTION

Selected publications included those that described coding, medical record documentation, healthcare reimbursement, quality metrics, administrative databases, Clinical Documentation Improvement programs, medical scribe programs, and various payment models.

DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant information was extracted to highlight the impact of diagnosis documentation on patient care, perceived patient severity of illness, quality metrics, and healthcare reimbursement. Query data from our hospital's Clinical Documentation Improvement program were reviewed to highlight areas of improvement within our own Division of Critical Care Medicine. Additionally, interventions to improve clinical documentation were incorporated into this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Available data in the literature indicate that documentation of precise diagnoses in the medical record has a positive impact on quality metrics, accuracy of administrative databases, hospital reimbursement, and perceived patient complexity. However, there is insufficient data to make conclusions regarding documentation of specific diagnoses and effects on patient care. Administrative responsibilities associated with documentation have been increasing, especially with the introduction of electronic medical records.

CONCLUSIONS

Documentation of specific diagnoses in the medical record is important in the broad context of our existing medical system but there is an associated burden in doing so. Widespread implementation of electronic medical record systems has inadvertently led to clinician dissatisfaction and burnout. Research is needed to further evaluate the impact of documentation on patient care as well as steps to decrease the associated burden.

Hospital Variations in Clinical Complications and Patient-reported Outcomes at 2 Years After Immediate Breast Reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to investigate case-mix adjusted hospital variations in 2-year clinical and patient-reported outcomes following immediate breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND

Over the past few decades, variations in medical practice have been viewed as opportunities to promote best practices and high-value care.

METHODS

The Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium Study is an National Cancer Institute-funded longitudinal, prospective cohort study assessing clinical and patient-reported outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy at 11 leading medical centers. Case-mix adjusted comparisons were performed using generalized linear mixed-effects models to assess variation across the centers in any complication, major complications, satisfaction with outcome, and satisfaction with breast.

RESULTS

Among 2252 women in the analytic cohort, 1605 (71.3%) underwent implant-based and 647 (28.7%) underwent autologous breast reconstruction. There were significant differences in the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and distribution of procedure types at the different Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium Study centers. After case-mix adjustments, hospital variations in the rates of any and major postoperative complications were observed. Medical center odds ratios for major complication ranged from 0.58 to 2.13, compared with the average major complication rate across centers. There were also meaningful differences in satisfaction with outcome (from the lowest to highest of -2.79-2.62) and in satisfaction with breast (-2.82-2.07) compared with the average values.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year postoperative complications varied widely between hospitals following post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. These variations represent an important opportunity to improve care through dissemination of best practices and highlight the limitations of extrapolating single-institution level data and the ongoing challenges of studying hospital-based outcomes for this patient population.

Transfer status in geriatric hip fracture surgery - An independent risk factor associated with 30-day mortality, re-operations and complications

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of patients undergoing hip fracture surgery are transferred from other locations. With no current orthopedic literature present, we sought to study the impact of transfer location on 30-day outcomes following geriatric hip fracture surgery.

MATERIALS & METHODS

The 2015-2016 ACS-NSQIP database was queried using CPT codes to retrieve records of geriatric patients undergoing hip fracture surgery (total hip arthroplasty/THA, hemiarthroplasty/HA and open reduction internal fixation/ORIF). Transfer status was defined into four groups - 1) No transfer (admitted from home), 2) From acute care hospital, 3) From nursing home/chronic care facility and 4) From outside emergency department (ED). Patients with missing data were excluded. A total of 31,218 patients were included in the final cohort.

RESULTS

Out of 31,218 patients - 23,659 (75.8%) were admitted from home, 1574 (5.0%) from acute care hospitals, 3299 (10.6%) from nursing home/chronic care facilities and 2686 (8.6%) from outside EDs. Following adjusted analysis, transfer from nursing home vs. home was associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality (OR 1.57 [95% 1.36-1.80]; p < 0.001), 30-day re-operations (OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.10-1.68]; p = 0.005), septic shock (OR 1.58 [95% CI 1.07-2.32]; p = 0.021), sepsis (OR 1.45 [95% CI 1.05-1.99]; p = 0.023) and urinary tract infection (OR 1.21 [95% CI 1.02-1.42]; p = 0.025). Additionally, transfer from outside ED vs. home was also associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality (OR 1.26 [95% CI 1.06-1.50]; p = 0.010).Transfer from any location (acute care hospital, nursing home and outside ED) was significantly associated with higher odds of non-home discharge (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Transfer status is an important risk factor associated with 30-day mortality and morbidity in geriatric patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. The findings stress the need for recognition of these patients as being a high-risk group to allow enhanced medical optimization in an attempt to minimize the risk of poor outcomes.

Hospital Readmission and Costs of Total Knee Replacement Surgery in 2009 and 2014: Potential Implications for Health Care Managers

The purpose of this article is to describe changes in hospital readmissions and costs for US hospital patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) in 2009 and 2014. Data came from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project net-Nationwide Readmissions Database. Compared with 2009, overall 30-day rates of readmissions after TKR decreased by 15% in 2014. Rates varied by demographics: readmission rates were lower for younger patients, males, Medicare recipients, and those with higher incomes. Overall, costs rose 20% across TKR groups. This report is among the first to describe changes in hospital readmissions and costs for TKR patients in a national sample of US acute care hospitals. Findings offer hospital managers a mechanism to benchmark their facilities' performances.

Bundled Payment "Creep": Institutional Redesign for Primary Arthroplasty Positively Affects Revision Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is associated with increased readmissions, complications, and expense compared to primary TJA. Bundled payment methods have been used to improve value of care in primary TJA, but little is known of their impact in revision TJA patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of a care redesign for a bundled payment model for primary TJA on quality metrics for revision patients, despite absence of a targeted intervention for revisions.

METHODS

We compared quality metrics for all revision TJA patients including readmission rate, use of post-acute care facility after discharge, length of stay, and cost, between the year leading up to the redesign and the 2 years following its implementation. Changes in the primary TJA group over the same time period were also assessed for comparison.

RESULTS

Despite a volume increase of 37% over the study period, readmissions declined from 8.9% to 5.8%. Use of post-acute care facilities decreased from 42% to 24%. Length of stay went from 4.84 to 3.92 days. Cost of the hospital episode declined by 5%.

CONCLUSION

Our health system experienced a halo effect from our bundled payment-influenced care redesign, with revision TJA patients experiencing notable improvements in several quality metrics, though not as pronounced as in the primary TJA population. These changes benefitted the patients, the health system, and the payers. We attribute these positive changes to an altered institutional mindset, resulting from an invested and aligned care team, with active physician oversight over the care episode.

Arthroplasty care redesign related to the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model: results at a tertiary academic medical center

Background

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains the highest expenditure in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) budget. One model to control cost is the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. There has been no published literature to date examining the efficacy of CJR on value-based outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and sustainability of a multidisciplinary care redesign for total joint arthroplasty under the CJR paradigm at an academic tertiary care center.

Methods

We implemented a system-wide care redesign, affecting all patients who underwent a total hip or total knee arthroplasty at our academic medical center. The main study outcomes were cost (to CMS), discharge destination, complications and readmissions, and length of stay (LOS); these were measured using the 2017 initial CJR reconciliation report, as well as our institutional database.

Results

The study included 1536 patients (41% Medicare). Per-episode cost to CMS declined by 19.5% to 11% below the CMS-designated national target. Home discharge increased from 62% to 87%. CMS readmissions declined from 15% to 6%; major complications decreased from 2.3% to 1.9%; and LOS declined from 3.6 to 2.1 days.

Conclusions

A mandatory episode-based bundled-payment program can induce favorable changes to value-based metrics, improving quality and outcomes for health-care consumers. Quality and value were improved in this study, evidenced by lower 90-day episode cost, more home discharges, lower readmissions and complications, and shorter LOS. This approach has implications not just for CMS, but for private payers, corporate health programs, and fixed-budget health-care models.

Outpatient Total Knee Arthroplasty: Are We There Yet? (Part 1)

Recent trends in total joint care have moved toward outpatient surgery. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a definitive management for end-stage osteoarthritis and has experienced increased utilization over the past several decades. The method by which surgeons conduct outpatient total knee procedures has yet to be fully elucidated as different institutions report different experiences from their pathways. This article will discuss current data and recommendations for implementing successful TKA and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty outpatient protocols. Specifically, this review will provide information regarding cost reduction, patient selection criteria, and preoperative medical optimization.

Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Outpatient Setting: What You Need to Know (Part 1)

The method by which surgeons conduct outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures has yet to be fully standardized. Careful examination of components involved in the preoperative phase of outpatient hip arthroplasty procedures may lead to improved outcomes. This article will discuss methods for implementing successful outpatient THA protocols. Specifically it reviews information regarding patient selection criteria, preoperative education, and preoperative medical optimization.

Thirty-Day Readmission Rate and Costs After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States

Background—

The association of short-term readmissions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on healthcare costs has not been well studied.

Methods and Results—

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Readmission Database encompassing 722 US hospitals was used to identify index PCI cases in patients ≥18 years old. Hierarchical regression analyses were used to examine the factors associated with risk of 30-day readmission and higher cumulative costs. We evaluated 206 869 hospitalized patients who survived to discharge after PCI from January through November 2013 and analyzed readmissions over 30 days after discharge. A total of 24 889 patients (12%) were readmitted within 30 days, with rates ranging from 6% to 17% across hospitals. Among the readmitted patients, 13% had PCI, 2% had coronary artery bypass surgery, and 3% died during the readmission. The most common reasons for readmission included nonspecific chest pain/angina (24%) and heart failure (11%). Mean cumulative costs were higher for those with readmissions ($39 634 versus $22 058; P <0.001). The multivariable analyses showed that readmission increased the log 10 cumulative costs by 45% (β: 0.445; P <0.001). There was no significant difference in cumulative costs by the type of insurance.

Conclusions—

In a national sample of inpatient PCI cases, 30-day readmissions were associated with a significant increase in cumulative costs. The majority of readmissions were because of low-risk chest pain that did not require any intervention. Ongoing effort is warranted to recognize and mitigate potentially preventable post-PCI readmissions.

Effect of Bundled Payments and Health Care Reform as Alternative Payment Models in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Clinical Review

BACKGROUND

In an effort to control rising healthcare costs, healthcare reforms have developed initiatives to evaluate the efficacy of alternative payment models (APMs) for Medicare reimbursements. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Innovation Center (CMMSIC) introduced the voluntary Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) model experiment as a means to curtail Medicare cost by allotting a fixed payment for an episode of care. The purpose of this review is to (1) summarize the preliminary clinical results of the BPCI and (2) discuss how it has led to other healthcare reforms and alternative payment models.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed and the CMMSIC to explore different APMs and clinical results after implementation. All studies that were not in English or unrelated to the topic were excluded.

RESULTS

Preliminary results of bundled payment models have shown reduced costs in total joint arthroplasty largely by reducing hospital length of stay, decreasing readmission rates, as well as reducing the number of patients sent to in-patient rehabilitation facilities. In order to refine episode of care bundles, CMMSIC has also developed other initiatives such as the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) pathway and Surgical Hip and Femur Fracture (SHFFT).

CONCLUSION

Despite the unknown future of the Affordable Care Act, BPCI, and CJR, preliminary results of alternative models have shown promise to reduce costs and improve quality of care. Moving into the future, surgeon control of the BPCI and CJR bundle should be investigated to further improve patient care and maximize financial compensation.

Measuring Provider Performance for Physicians Participating in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System

In 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services began requiring all eligible providers to participate in the Quality Payment Program or face financial reimbursement penalty. The Quality Payment Program outlines two paths for provider participation: the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System and Advanced Alternative Payment Models. For the first performance period beginning in January of 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that approximately 83 to 90 percent of eligible providers will not qualify for participation in an Advanced Alternative Payment Model and therefore must participate in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System program. The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System path replaces existing quality-reporting programs and adds several new measures to evaluate providers using four categories of data: (1) quality, (2) cost/resource use, (3) improvement activities, and (4) advancing care information. These categories will be combined to calculate a weighted composite score for each provider or provider group. Composite Merit-Based Incentive Payment System scores based on 2017 performance data will be used to adjust reimbursed payment in 2019. In this article, the authors provide relevant background for understanding value-based provider performance measurement. The authors also discuss Merit-Based Incentive Payment System reporting requirements and scoring methodology to provide plastic surgeons with the necessary information to critically evaluate their own practice capabilities in the context of current performance metrics under the Quality Payment Program.

Value-Based Payment Reform and the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015: A Primer for Plastic Surgeons

In 2015, the U.S. Congress passed the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, which effectively repealed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services sustainable growth rate formula and established the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Quality Payment Program. The Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act represents an unparalleled acceleration toward value-based payment models and a departure from traditional volume-driven fee-for-service reimbursement. The Quality Payment Program includes two paths for provider participation: the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System and Advanced Alternative Payment Models. The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System pathway replaces existing quality reporting programs and adds several new measures to create a composite performance score for each provider (or provider group) that will be used to adjust reimbursed payment. The advanced alternative payment model pathway is available to providers who participate in qualifying Advanced Alternative Payment Models and is associated with an initial 5 percent payment incentive. The first performance period for the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System opens January 1, 2017, and closes on December 31, 2017, and is associated with payment adjustments in January of 2019. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that the majority of providers will begin participation in 2017 through the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System pathway, but aims to have 50 percent of payments tied to quality or value through Advanced Alternative Payment Models by 2018. In this article, the authors describe key components of the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act to providers navigating through the Quality Payment Program and discuss how plastic surgeons may optimize their performance in this new value-based payment program.

The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015: What's New?

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its Final Rule on the Medicare Access and CHIP [Children's Health Insurance Program] Reauthorization Act (MACRA) in November 2016. The Rule finalizes the details of the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) and the alternative payment model (APM), which will now collectively be referred to as the Quality Payment Program (QPP). This article offers the orthopaedic community a summary of the alterations in healthcare policy that will affect practices nationwide.

Pay-for-performance in orthopedics: how we got here and where we are going

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Recent health laws have shifted from the traditional fee-for-service model toward a pay-for-performance model. In this changing climate, it is imperative that a provider understands these changes and recognizes the importance of health services research on medicine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increasing the value of care by improving quality and decreasing cost has been the focus of several projects. Preventing complications may be an effective way to increase value. Patient risk stratification is a modifiable variable that will allow for improved patient selection. This in turn may reduce adverse events, thereby lessening the economic burden of complications, increased length of stay, and hospital readmission. Providers must partner with their hospitals to align their goals and maximize quality and efficiency in order to decrease costs.