Faculty Bibliography

The areas of the most frequent cartilage loss in mild-moderate medial osteoarthritis (OA) were reviewed from previous studies. Implant components were designed to resurface these areas. The surface geometries of the components were based on an average femur and tibia produced from 20 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) models of normal knees. Accuracy of fit of the components was determined on these 20 individual knees. The femoral surface was toroidal, covering a band on the distal end of the femur, angled inward anteriorly. For a five-size system, the average deviations between the implant surfaces and the intact cartilage surfaces of 20 femurs were only 0.3 mm. For the tibia, the deviations were 0.5-0.7 mm, but the errors were mainly around the tibial spine, with smaller deviations in the central bearing region. Hence, these small implant components would accurately restore the original bearing surfaces and allow for preservation of all the knee structures. Using a thin metal component for the tibia would preserve the strong cancellous bone near the surface, an advantage for fixation. In this case, the femoral component would have a plastic bearing surface, but still be less than 10mm thickness. Such a design could have a useful place in the early treatment of medial OA of the knee.

BACKGROUND: To curb the unsustainable rise in health care expenses, health care payers are developing programs to incentivize hospitals and physicians to improve the value of care delivered to patients. Payers are utilizing various metrics, such as length of stay (LOS) and unplanned readmissions, to track progression of quality metrics. Relevant to orthopedic surgeons, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced in 2015 the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Payment Model-a program aimed at improving the quality of health care delivered to patients by shifting more of the financial risk of patient care onto providers. METHODS: We analyzed the medical records of 1329 consecutive lower extremity total joint patients enrolled in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Bundled Program for Care Improvement treated over a 21-month period. The goal of this study was to ascertain if hospital LOS is associated with unplanned readmissions within 90 days of admission for a total hip or knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: After controlling for multiple demographic variables including sex, age, comorbidities and discharge location, we found that hospital LOS greater than 4 days is a significant risk factor for unplanned readmission within 90 days (odd ratio = 1.928, P = .010). Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and discharge to a location other than home are also independent risk factors for 90-day readmission. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that increased LOS is a significant risk factor for readmission within 90 days of admission for a hip or knee arthroplasty in the Medicare population.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether bundled payments are feasible in the orthopaedic fracture setting, and the potential economic implications of this reimbursement structure. DESIGN: Prospective. SETTING: Multicenter. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Between 2004 and 2014, a total of 23,643 operatively treated patients with fracture and 544,067 patients with total joint arthroplasty (TJA) were identified using the New York State Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. INTERVENTIONS: Severity of illness (SOI), hospital charges ($USD), length of stay (LOS; days), and discharge disposition (homebound vs. not) were collected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patients were subdivided into groups of minor and severe SOI. Differences in hospital charges, LOS, and discharge disposition were analyzed. Differences in charges, LOS, and discharges were further analyzed based on minor and severe SOI. RESULTS: The difference in hospital charge between patients with minor or severe SOI undergoing elective TJA ranged between 153% and 211%. In contrast, patients undergoing fracture surgery exhibited differences ranging from 314% to 489% between minor and severe SOI levels. Similar differences were observed regarding mean hospital LOS and homebound discharge disposition, with patients with fracture demonstrating greater sensitivity to increasing SOI. CONCLUSIONS: Although bundled payments may be a viable option for patients undergoing elective TJA, this payment model requires particular attention when applied to fracture care.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the Risk Assessment and Predictor Tool (RAPT) and patient discharge disposition in an institution participating in bundled payment program for total joint replacement, spine fusion and cardiac valve surgery patients. METHOD: Between April 2014 and April 2015, RAPT scores of 767 patients (535 primary unilateral total joint arthroplasty; 150 cardiac valve replacement; 82 spinal fusions) were prospectively captured. Total RAPT scores were grouped into three levels for risk of complications: <6='high risk', between 6 and 9 ='medium risk', and >9='low risk' for discharge to a post-acute facility. Associations between RAPT categories and patient discharge to home versus any facility were conducted. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine if there was any correlation between RAPT score and discharge to any facility. RESULTS: 70.5% of total joint patients, 80.7% of cardiac valve surgery patients and 70.7% of spine surgery patients were discharged home rather than to a post-acute facility. RAPT risk categories were related to discharge disposition as 72% of those in the high risk group were discharged to a facility and 91% in the low risk group were discharged to home in the total joint replacement cohort. In the cardiac cohort, only 33% of the high risk group was discharged to a facility, and 94% of the low risk group was discharged to home. In the spinal fusion cohort, 60% of those in the high risk group were discharged to a facility and 86% in the low risk group were discharged to home. Multivariate analysis showed that being in the high risk category versus low risk category was significantly associated with substantially increased odds of discharge to a facility. CONCLUSION: The RAPT tool has shown the ability to predict discharge disposition for total joint and spine surgery patients, but not cardiac valve surgery patients, where the majority of patients in all categories were discharged home, at an institution participating in a bundled payment program. The ability to identify discharge disposition pre-operatively is valuable for improving care coordination, directing care resources and establishing and maintaining patient and family expectations.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative in 2011. Through BPCI, organizations enlisted into payment agreements that include both performance and financial accountability for episodes of care. To succeed, BPCI requires quality maintenance and care delivery at lower costs. This necessitates physicians and hospitals to merge interests. Orthopaedic surgeons must assume leadership roles in cost containment, surgical safety, and quality assurance to deliver cost-effective care. Because most orthopaedic surgeons practice independently and are not employed by hospitals, models of physician-hospital alignment (e.g., physician-hospital organizations) or contracted gainsharing arrangements between practices and hospitals may be necessary for successful bundled pricing. Under BPCI, hospitals, surgeons, or third parties share rewards but assume risks for the bundle.For patients, cost savings must be associated with maintenance or improvement in quality metrics. However, the definition of quality can vary, as can the rewards for processes and outcomes. Risk stratification for potential complications should be considered in bundled pricing agreements to prevent the exclusion of patients with substantial comorbidities and higher care costs (e.g., hip fractures treated with prostheses). Bundled pricing depends on economies of scale for success; smaller institutions must be cautious, as 1 costly patient could substantially impact the finances of its entire program. CMS recommends a minimum of 100 to 200 cases yearly. We also suggest that participants utilize technologies to maximize efficiency and provide the best possible environment for implementation of bundled payments. Substantial investment in infrastructure is required to develop programs to improve coordination of care, manage quality data, and distribute payments. Smaller institutions may have difficulty devoting resources to these infrastructural changes, although changes may be implemented more thoroughly once initiated. Herein, we discuss our early total joint arthroplasty BPCI experience at our tertiary-care academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Although pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) affects rehabilitation, length of stay, and functional outcomes, pain management for patients undergoing TKA has yet to be standardized. Femoral nerve blocks (FNBs) are commonly used as an adjunct; however, these can result in transient quadriceps weakness and have been associated with in-hospital falls. Periarticular infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine has been recently introduced as a long-acting analgesic that can be administered without affecting motor function. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does periarticular liposomal bupivacaine compared with FNB result in improved pain control as measured by pain scores and narcotic consumption? (2) How do liposomal bupivacaine and FNB compare in terms of gait and stairclimbing milestones and the proportion of patients who experienced a fall in the hospital? METHODS: Between September 2013 and October 2014, a retrospective analysis was conducted involving 24 surgeons who performed a total of 1373 unilateral, primary TKAs. From September 2013 to April 2014, the routine approach to TKA pain management pathway consisted of preoperative administration of oral analgesics, intraoperative anesthesia (preferred spinal or general), an ultrasound-guided FNB, intraoperative analgesic cocktail injection, patient-controlled analgesia, and oral and IV narcotics for pain as needed. A total of 583 patients were included in this study group. Starting May 2014, FNBs were discouraged and there was department-wide adoption of liposomal bupivacaine. Liposomal bupivacaine became routinely used in all patients undergoing TKA with no other changes made to the multimodal analgesia protocol at that time, and 527 patients in this study group were compared with the FNB cohort. Chart review on a total of 1110 patients was conducted by a research assistant who was not participating in patient care. During the inpatient stay, pain scores during 8-hour intervals, narcotic use, and physical therapy milestones were compared. RESULTS: With the numbers available, we detected no clinically important difference in pain scores throughout the hospital stay; however, patients treated with liposomal bupivacaine consumed very slightly less narcotics overall (96 +/- 62 versus 84 +/- 73 eq mg of morphine; [95% confidence interval, 11-13 mg]; p = 0.004) through postoperative Day 2 of inpatient hospitalization. Seventy-seven percent (406 of 527) of patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine achieved their gait milestones of clearing 100 feet of ambulation versus 60% (349 of 583) of patients receiving FNB (p < 0.001) before discharge. Likewise, 94% (497 of 527) of patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine completed stairs compared with 73% (427 of 583) of patients receiving FNB (p < 0.001). Patients who received liposomal bupivacaine were less likely to experience a fall during the hospital stay than were patients treated with FNB (3 of 527 [0.6%] versus 12 of 583 [2%]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of strong data supporting FNB over liposomal bupivacaine, we have modified our TKA pain management protocols by adopting liposomal bupivacaine in lieu of FNBs, facilitating rapid rehabilitation while providing adequate pain control. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

INTRODUCTION: Reducing readmissions after orthopedic surgery is important for decreasing hospital costs and patient morbidity. Our goals were to establish national rates and reasons for 30-day readmissions after common elective orthopedic procedures. METHODS: Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty, posterior lumbar fusion, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, or total shoulder arthroplasty were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Thirty-day readmission rates, timing, and reasons were recorded for each procedure. Multivariate analysis was used to identify risk factors of readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 3.8% of patients had an all-cause readmission, 3.6% had an unplanned readmission, and 2.4% had an unplanned readmission related to surgery (URRS). The most common reason was surgical site complication followed by venous thromboembolism and bleeding. Only 3.2% of all patients with a URRS were readmitted because of a predischarge complication. Independent predictors of URRS were current smoking, any inpatient complication, and non-home discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned readmissions were a proxy for new postdischarge complications rather than a re-exacerbation of previous inpatient events. Emphasis should be on more effective prevention strategies for surgical site infections, continuing to prevent inpatient complications and focusing on home discharge.

BACKGROUND: In January 2013, a large, tertiary, urban academic medical center began participation in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative for total joint arthroplasty, a program implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in 2011. Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs) 469 and 470 were included. We participated in BPCI Model 2, by which an episode of care includes the inpatient and all post-acute care costs through 90 days following discharge. The goal for this initiative is to improve patient care and quality through a patient-centered approach with increased care coordination supported through payment innovation. METHODS: Length of stay (LOS), readmissions, discharge disposition, and cost per episode of care were analyzed for year 3 compared with year 1 of the initiative. Multiple programs were implemented after the first year to improve performance metrics: a surgeon-directed preoperative risk-factor optimization program, enhanced care coordination and home services, a change in venous thromboembolic disease (VTED) prophylaxis to a risk-stratified protocol, infection-prevention measures, a continued emphasis on discharge to home rather than to an inpatient facility, and a quality-dependent gain-sharing program among surgeons. RESULTS: There were 721 Medicare primary total joint arthroplasty patients in year 1 and 785 in year 3; their data were compared. The average hospital LOS decreased from 3.58 to 2.96 days. The rate of discharge to an inpatient facility decreased from 44% to 28%. The 30-day all-cause readmission rate decreased from 7% to 5%; the 60-day all-cause readmission rate decreased from 11% to 6%; and the 90-day all-cause readmission rate decreased from 13% to 8%. The average 90-day cost per episode decreased by 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term results from the implementation of Medicare BPCI Model 2 for primary total joint arthroplasty demonstrated decreased LOS, decreased discharges to inpatient facilities, decreased readmissions, and decreased cost of the episode of care in year 3 compared with year 1, resulting in increased value to all stakeholders involved in this initiative and suggesting that continued improvement over initial gains is possible.

BACKGROUND: The post-acute care strategies after lower extremity total joint arthroplasty including the use of post-acute rehabilitation centers and home therapy services are associated with different costs. Providers in bundled payment programs are incentivized to use the most cost-effective strategies. METHODS: We used decision analysis to examine the impact of extending the inpatient hospital stay to avoid discharge of patients to a post-acute rehabilitation facility. RESULTS: The results of this decision analysis show that extended acute hospital care for up to 5.2 extra days to allow for home discharge, rather than discharge to a post-acute inpatient facility can be financially preferable, provided quality is not negatively impacted. CONCLUSION: The data demonstrate that because the cost of additional acute care hospital days is relatively small and because the cost of an extended post-acute inpatient rehabilitation facility is high, keeping patients in the acute facility for a few extra days and then discharging them directly to home may result in an overall lower cost than discharge after a shorter hospital stay to an expensive post-acute facility. However, this approach will have challenges, and future studies are needed to evaluate this change in strategy.