Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:As the number of total hip and knee arthroplasty cases increases, it is important to understand the burden of factors that impact patient outcomes of these procedures. This article examined the time trends in key demographics, clinical characteristics, comorbidity burden (Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]), and presence of depression in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty using population-based, all-payer inpatient database, California Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, from 2007 to 2010. METHODS:Chi-square tests and analysis of variance were used. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were also performed to compare the prevalence of depression in 2007 to later years. RESULTS:In the primary total hip arthroplasty cohort, the prevalence of depression significantly increased by 20%, mean age decreased by 0.4 years, mean length of stay (LOS) decreased by 0.5 days, and having a CCI score of ≥3 increased by 30% (P value < .001 for all) over the study period. Similarly, in the primary total knee arthroplasty cohort, the prevalence of depression increased by 23%, the mean age decreased by 0.4 years, mean LOS decreased by 0.4 days, and the prevalence of CCI score of ≥3 increased by 35% (P value < .001 for all). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite the younger age of the joint arthroplasty population over time, we found increased prevalence of depression and comorbidity scores but shorter LOS. Further study is needed to determine the impact of the changing demographics of the total joint population and the best strategies to optimize their outcome with these procedures.

BACKGROUND:Robotic and computer navigation technology is available to surgeons for use in hip and knee arthroplasties to increase the precision of component placement. However, they do add significant costs to these procedures, and the long-term clinical outcomes and value of technology assistance for joint replacement remain unclear. METHODS:We identified 321,522 patients in Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups 469 and 470 who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (N = 133,472) or primary total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (N = 188,050) between 2008 and 2015 in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS). RESULTS:Among all total joint arthroplasties performed during this period, technology assistance was used in 5.1% of cases. Technology assistance was more common for knee (7.3%) than hip (1.9%) arthroplasty (P < .001). The proportion of cases using technology assistance grew each year, increasing from 2.8% (knee 4.3% and hip 0.5%) in 2008 to 8.6% (knee 11.6% and hip 5.2%) in 2015 (P trend <.001). The proportion of hospitals and surgeons using robotic assistance also increased during the study period, increasing from 16.2% of hospitals and 6.2% of surgeons in 2008 to 29.2% of hospitals and 17.1% of surgeons in 2015 (P trend <.001 for both). Technology was more likely to be used for patients with private insurance (5.9%) compared with Medicare (4.7%, P < .001) or Medicaid (2.2%, P < .001), and for patients at high-volume (6.9%, P < .001) or very high-volume (6.1%, P < .001) as compared with low-volume (2.7%) hospitals. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Technology assistance has become increasingly used by orthopedic surgeons for hip and knee arthroplasties, however, adoption has not been uniform.

The purpose of this study was to compare nonelective and all-cause readmission rates and to identify risk factors for readmission of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients who had preoperative bariatric surgery (BS) compared with TJA patients without preoperative BS. The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was queried to identify 343,710 TJA patients between 2005 and 2014. Three patient groups were evaluated: group 1 (patients with preoperative BS within 2 years of TJA [N=1478]); group 2 (obese patients without preoperative BS [N=60,259]); and group 3 (nonobese patients without preoperative BS [N=281,973]). Nonelective and all-cause readmission rates (30 days, 90 days, and 1 year) were compared, and multivariate analyses of readmission risk factors were performed. Group 1 had no significant difference in nonelective readmission rates compared with groups 2 and 3. However, when elective TJA readmissions were included, group 1 had significantly higher all-cause readmission rates at 30 days, 90 days, and 1 year compared with groups 2 and 3. Bariatric surgery was not a risk factor for nonelective readmissions at any time point. When elective TJA admissions were included, BS was an independent risk factor for all-cause readmission at all time points. Patients who have BS prior to TJA do not have higher nonelective readmission rates than obese TJA patients without BS. Bariatric surgery is not a risk factor for nonelective readmissions. However, BS is a significant predictor of elective TJA admissions up to 1 year following the index TJA. [Orthopedics. 201x; xx(x):xx-xx.].

BACKGROUND:The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative was developed to reduce costs associated with total joint arthroplasty through a single payment for all patient care from index admission through a 90-day post-discharge period, including care at skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). The aim of this study is to investigate whether forming partnerships between hospitals and SNFs could lower the post-discharge costs. We hypothesize that institutionally aligned SNFs have lower post-discharge costs than non-aligned SNFs. METHODS:A cohort of 615 elective, primary total hip and knee arthroplasty subjects discharged to an SNF under the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement from 2014 to 2016 were included in our analysis. Patients were grouped into one of the 3 categories of SNF alignment: group 1: non-partners; group 2: agreement-based partners; group 3: institution-owned partners. Demographics, comorbidities, length of stay (LOS) at SNF, and associated costs during the 90-day post-operative period were compared between the 3 groups. RESULTS:Mean index hospital LOS was statistically shortest in group 3 (mean 2.7 days vs 3.5 for groups 1 and 2, P = .001). SNF LOS was also shortest in group 3 (mean 11 days vs 19 and 21 days in groups 2 and 1 respectively, P < .001). Total SNF costs and total 90-day costs were both significantly lower in group 3 compared with groups 1 and 2 (P < .001 for all), even after controlling for medical comorbidities. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Institution-owned partner SNFs demonstrated the shortest patient LOS, and the lowest SNF and total 90-day costs, without increased risk of readmissions, compared with other SNFs.

BACKGROUND:Individuals coinfected with both hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV represent a unique and growing population of patients undergoing orthopaedic surgical procedures. Data regarding complications for HCV monoinfection or HIV monoinfection are robust, but there are no data available, to our knowledge, on patients who have both HCV and HIV infections. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:We sought to determine whether patients with coinfection differed in terms of baseline demographics and comorbidity burden as compared with patients without coinfection and whether these potential differences were translated into varying levels of postoperative complications, mortality, and hospital readmission risk. Specifically, we asked: (1) Are there demonstrable differences in baseline demographic variables between patients infected with HCV and HIV and those who do not have those infections (age, sex, race, and insurance status)? (2) Do patients with HCV and HIV infection differ from patients without those infections in terms of other medical comorbidities? (3) Do patients with HCV/HIV coinfection have a higher incidence of early postoperative complications and mortality than patients without coinfection? (4) Is the frequency of readmission greater for patients with HCV/HIV coinfection than those without? METHODS:The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database was used to identify patients undergoing THA between 2010 and 2014. The SPARCS database is particularly useful because it captures 100% of all New York State inpatient admissions while providing detailed demographic and comorbidity data for a large, heterogeneous patient population with long-term followup. Patients were stratified into four groups based on HCV/HIV status: control patients without disease, HCV monoinfection, HIV monoinfection, and coinfection. We sought to determine whether patients coinfected with HCV and HIV would differ in terms of demographics from patients without those infections and whether patients with HCV and HIV would have a greater risk of complications, longer length of stay, and hospital readmission. A total of 80,722 patients underwent THA between 2010 and 2014. A total of 98.55% (79,554 of 80,722) of patients did not have either HCV or HIV, 0.66% (530 of 80,722) had HCV monoinfection, 0.66% (534 of 80,722) HIV monoinfection, and 0.13% (104 of 80,722) were coinfected with both HCV and HIV. Multivariate analysis was performed controlling for age, sex, insurance, residency status, diagnosis, and comorbidities to allow for an equal comparison between groups. RESULTS:Patients with coinfection were more likely to be younger, male (odds ratio [OR], 2.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.20-3.13; p < 0.001), insured by Medicaid (OR, 6.43; 4.41-7.55; p < 0.001), have a history of avascular necrosis (OR, 8.76; 7.20-9.53; p < 0.001), and to be homeless (OR, 6.95; 5.31-7.28; p < 0.001) as compared with patients without HIV or HCV. Additionally, patients with coinfection had the highest proportion of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and tobacco use along with a high proportion of psychiatric disorders, including depression. HCV and HIV coinfection were independent risk factors for increased length of stay (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.29-3.01; p < 0.001), having two or more in-hospital complications (OR, 1.64; 1.01-2.67; p < 0.001), and 90-day readmission rates (OR, 2.97; 1.86-4.77; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:As the prevalence of HCV and HIV coinfectivity continues to increase, orthopaedic surgeons will encounter a greater number of these patients. Awareness of the demographic and socioeconomic factors leading to increased complications after THA will allow physicians to consider interventions such as in-hospital psychiatric counseling, advanced discharge planning, and coordination with social work and collaboration with HCV/HIV infectious disease specialists to improve patient health status to improve outcomes and reduce costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, therapeutic study.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of total joint arthroplasties (TJAs) performed in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) is increasing. However, not all TJA patients are healthy enough to safely undergo these procedures in an ambulatory setting. We examined the percentage of arthroplasty patients who would be eligible to have the procedure performed in a free-standing ASC and the distribution of comorbidities making patients ASC-ineligible. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 3444 patients undergoing TJA and assigned ASC eligibility based on American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, a set of exclusion criteria, and any existing comorbidities. RESULTS: Overall, 70.03% of all patients undergoing TJA were eligible for ASC. Of the ASA class 3 patients who did not meet any exclusion criteria but had systemic disease (51.11% of all ASA class 3 patients), 53.69% were deemed ASC-eligible because of sufficiently low severity of comorbidities. The most frequent reasons for ineligibility were body mass index >40 kg/m2 (32.66% of ineligible patients), severity of comorbidities (28.00%), and untreated obstructive sleep apnea (25.19%). CONCLUSION: A large proportion of TJA patients were found to be eligible for surgery in an ASC, including over one-third of ASA class 3 patients. ASC performed TJA provides an opportunity for increased patient satisfaction and decreased costs, selecting the right candidates for the ambulatory setting is critical to maintain patient safety and avoid postoperative complications.

BACKGROUND:TKA pain management protocols vary widely with no current consensus on a standardized pain management regimen. Multimodal TKA pain management protocols aim to address pain control, facilitate functional recovery, and maintain patient satisfaction. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:(1) Did changes to our pain management protocol, specifically adding liposomal bupivacaine, eliminating patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and discontinuing femoral nerve blocks (FNBs), affect narcotic consumption after TKA? (2) Did these changes to our pain management protocols affect patient-reported pain scores? (3) Does the use of an immediate postoperative PCA affect rapid rehabilitation and functional recovery? (4) How did changes to our pain management regimen affect discharge disposition and pain-related Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores? METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed an institutional arthroplasty database between September 2013 and September 2015 containing 1808 patients who underwent primary TKA. Departmental pain management protocols were compared in 6-month periods as the protocol changed. All patients received a multimodal pain management protocol including preoperative oral medications, spinal or general anesthesia, a short-acting intraoperative pericapsular injection, and continued postoperative oral narcotics for breakthrough pain. From September 2013 to April 2014, all patients received an intraoperative FNB and a PCA for the first 24 hours postoperatively (Cohort 1). From May 2014 to October 2014, a periarticular injection of liposomal bupivacaine was added to the protocol and FNBs were discontinued (Cohort 2). After April 2015, PCA was eliminated (Cohort 3). No other major changes were made to the TKA pain management pathways. Narcotic use, pain scores on 8-hour intervals, physical therapy milestones, and discharge disposition were compared. RESULTS:Total narcotic use was the least in Cohort 3 (Cohort 3: 66 ± 54 morphine milligram equivalents versus Cohort 2: 82 ± 72 versus Cohort 1: 96 ± 62; p < 0.001). There was an increase in pain score immediately after surgery in Cohort 3 (4.0 ± 3.5 versus 1.2 ± 2.2 versus 1.2 ± 2.5, post hoc analysis of Cohort 2 versus 3: mean difference 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-3.0; p < 0.001); however, it was not different for the remainder of the hospital stay. Patients who did not receive PCA reached functional milestones for both gait and stairs faster by postoperative day 1 (47% [328 of 698] versus 30% [158 of 527] versus 16% [93 of 583], p < 0.001; Cohort 3 versus 2: odds ratio 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.6; p < 0.001). Discharge to home occurred more frequently (84% [583 of 698] versus 78% [410 of 527] versus 72% [421 of 583], p = 0.010) in Cohort 3. There were no differences in pain-related HCAHPS scores across all cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:Discontinuing PCAs and FNBs from our multimodal TKA pain management protocols and adding liposomal bupivacaine resulted in fewer narcotics consumed with no difference in pain control and faster functional recovery while maintaining high HCAHPS scores relating to pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, therapeutic study.

Background/UNASSIGNED:It is often assumed that each surgeon's patient population is similar to that of his or her peers. Differences in patient characteristics naturally may lead to diverse outcomes. To date, the variability of individual surgeons' patient populations has not been adequately characterized. The purpose of this study is to describe the variation in physician-specific patient characteristics among surgeons performing spine fusion surgery at a large, urban academic medical center. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We analyzed administrative data from a single institution for spine fusion surgery from 2009 to 2013. There were 6585 primary and 362 revision cases of spine fusion performed within this time period. Variability between surgeons and their respective patient populations was compared using descriptive statistics. Results/UNASSIGNED:The mean annual percentage of primary fusion patients with diabetes mellitus ranged from 0 to 16.17% (mean ± SD, 7.79% ± 3.96%) but constituted anywhere from 0 to 41.58% (mean ± SD, 8.15% ± 12.09%) of revision fusions. The mean annual percentage of primary fusion patients who were obese ranged from 0 to 9% (mean ± SD, 2.95% ± 2.7%), and 0 to 25% in revision cases (mean ± SD, 3.43% ± 6.43%). The annual mean percentage of patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores greater than 3 ranged from 8.8% to 44.43% (mean ± SD, 20.42% ± 8.85%) in primary fusions and 0 to 100% (mean ± SD, 32.79% ± 23.47%) in revision fusions. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:There was a large amount of variability among surgeons' patient populations when looking at characteristics such as obesity, diabetes, and ASA scores >3. These factors have been shown to impact patient outcomes. The variability in the patient populations of individual surgeons' practices even within the same medical center must be taken into account when evaluating physician specific outcomes and quality of care.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Implant price has been identified as a significant contributing factor to high costs associated with revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The goal of this study is to analyze the cost of implants used in rTKAs and to compare this pricing with 2 alternative pricing models. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Using our institutional database, we identified 52 patients from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014. Average cost of components for each case was calculated and compared to the total hospital cost for that admission. Costs for an all-component revision were then compared to a proposed "direct to hospital" (DTH) standardized pricing model and a fixed price revision option. Potential savings were calculated from these figures. Results/UNASSIGNED:On average, 28% of the total hospital cost was spent on implants for rTKA. The average cost for revision of all components was $13,640 and ranged from $3000 to $28,000. On average, this represented 32.7% of the total hospital cost. Direct to hospital implant pricing could potentially save approximately $7000 per rTKA, and the fixed pricing model could provide a further $1000 reduction per rTKA-potentially saving $8000 per case on implants alone. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Alternative implant pricing models could help lower the total cost of rTKA, which would allow hospitals to achieve significant cost containment.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The population of patients in the USA over the age of 65 is expected to significantly increase over the next 40 years. These patients are at increased risk for hip fractures and will pose a burden to providers in the near future. In order to provide high value care, providers will need to maintain positive outcomes, mitigate complications, and reduce overall cost burdens. This study was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of a patient transfer protocol between a large academic medical center and a single specialty orthopaedic institution. The protocol was, in turn, designed to provide high value care to the patients by safely redirecting a large volume of patients to the single specialty institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Over one calendar year, data was prospectively gathered on all patients admitted to our academic center's ER with hip fractures. Patients were then triaged to high or low risk for transfer according to an established set of medical criteria. Patients deemed low risk for transfer were sent to our single specialty orthopaedic institution for management. Data capture and analysis were completed using MS Excel and SPSS, respectively. RESULTS:Patients treated at the single specialty orthopaedic institution experienced shorter overall hospital stays and were more likely to be discharged to home than a rehabilitation facility (6.35 versus 8.79 days, p < 0.0001; 22% versus 4%, p = 0.49). There was no significant delay in time to surgery for patients that were transferred (65 versus 79 hours, p = 0.18). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The transfer protocol was both safe and effective for patients with hip fractures. Transferring patients for treatment at single specialty institutions has the potential to significantly reduce hospital stays and is more likely to result in discharge to home than a rehabilitation facility, thus successfully providing high value care to patients.