Faculty Bibliography

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:non-anterior (NA) surgical approaches on prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and examined the impact of new perioperative protocols on PJI rates following all surgical approaches at a single institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:(13.3 to 57.6, sd 6.1), respectively. Infection rates were calculated yearly for the DA and NA approach groups. Covariates were assessed and used in multivariate analysis to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for risk of development of PJI with DA compared with NA approaches. In order to determine the effect of adopting a set of infection prevention protocols on PJI, we calculated ORs for PJI comparing patients undergoing THA for two distinct time periods: 2013 to 2014 and 2015 to 2016. These periods corresponded to before and after we implemented a set of perioperative infection protocols. RESULTS:There were 1985 patients in the DA group and 4101 patients in the NA group. The overall rate of PJI at our institution during the study period was 0.82% (50/6086) and decreased from 0.96% (12/1245) in 2013 to 0.53% (10/1870) in 2016. There were 24 deep PJIs in the DA group (1.22%) and 26 deep PJIs in the NA group (0.63%; p = 0.023). After multivariate analysis, the DA approach was 2.2 times more likely to result in PJI than the NA approach (OR 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.1 to 3.9); p = 0.006) for the overall study period. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:2019;101-B(6 Supple B):2-8.

BACKGROUND:The study assesses whether Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores were influenced by hospital length of stay (LOS) and discharge disposition. METHODS:HCAHPS scores from 5,682 orthopaedic patients were collected over a 4-year period. Statistical analyses were run to identify associations between Top-Box scores for each HCAHPS domain and LOS or discharge disposition (home versus rehabilitation facility). RESULTS:Decreased LOS was associated with increased HCAHPS Top-Box scores for every Top-Box domain except for Discharge composite (P ≤ 0.001 to 0.011). Discharge to home was associated with increased HCAHPS scores for four Top-Box domains (P ≤ 0.001 to 0.009). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Shorter LOS and discharge to home after orthopaedic surgery are associated with better HCAHPS scores. Earlier discharge leads to an improved patient-reported experience and can increase reimbursements. Expedient, appropriate discharge of hospitalized orthopaedic patients should be a treatment goal after orthopaedic surgery.

BACKGROUND:Routine immediate postoperative laboratory studies, including metabolic panels and hematologic profiles, are commonly ordered after arthroplasty procedures. However, their values only occasionally influence management. This study investigated the clinical utility and value of these tests. METHODS:A large retrospective cohort study of 18,935 patients spanning a 6-year period from 2008 to 2013 from a single high-volume institution was evaluated. Only immediate postoperative labs drawn on postoperative day 0 in the recovery room were included in the study. Complete blood counts (CBC) and basic metabolic panels (BMP) were reviewed, and ranges of abnormal were set for each lab test based on values significant enough to impact patient management. Cost effectiveness calculations were made based on current cost of the laboratory tests. RESULTS:Actionably low hemoglobin values ( < 8 g/dL) were found in 1.44% of the overall cohort. Unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty was associated with the fewest hemoglobin abnormalities at 0.59%. Primary unilateral total hip arthroplasty was associated with abnormal hemoglobin values in 1.81% of cases. Significant electrolyte abnormalities were far less common, with hyperkalemia (> 6.5 mEq/L) in 0.19%, hyponatremia ( < 120 mEq/L) in 0.01% and elevated creatinine (> 2.0 mg/dL) was found in 0.25%. Hemoglobin values were calculated at a cost of $1,710 to detect a single significantly abnormal result. The cost to detect a single actionably abnormal BMP value was $1,000. CONCLUSIONS:Routine immediate postoperative laboratory tests represent a high institutional cost and are seldom abnormal enough to warrant a change in patient management. The routine use of these tests can likely be safely eliminated in uncomplicated primary unilateral arthroplasty procedures.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Hip and knee arthroplasty are high volume, clinically successful, but costly orthopedic surgical procedures. There is significant variation in volume, outcomes, and cost at various hospitals. METHODS:Using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database to determine readmission rates and the New York State Department of Health (NYSDoH) hospital cost transparency database to obtain costs, we reviewed this data for hip and knee replacements to determine if there was a relationship between volume of procedures performed and cost or readmission rates. RESULTS:The readmission rate increased with increasing cost for facilities performing total knee arthroplasty (p = 0.02). Readmission rate did not change significantly with volume of procedures performed. Similarly, the readmission rate increased with increasing cost for facilities performing total hip arthroplasty but did not change significantly with respect to volume (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Spending more money to perform total hip and knee arthroplasty in New York State does not ensure lower readmission rates. Readmission rates vary independent of volume of procedures performed. Total hip and knee arthroplasty are two of the most successful and commonly performed orthopedic surgical procedures. Outcome investigations demonstrate reliable pain relief and consistently good or excellent functional outcomes.1-3 However, there is significant variability in both cost and quality of these procedures, resulting in a wide difference in their value. Porter defines value as outcomes divided by cost.4 One metric that reflects both the cost as well as the quality of care is the unplanned readmission rate. Whether readmission occurs as a result of thromboembolic disease, surgical site infection, or cardiopulmonary complications in the postoperative period, it represents a deterioration of outcome at a significant cost burden to the treating institution. The New York State Department of Health's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database was established in 1979. Licensed hospitals in the state are mandated to report data on all discharges, including inpatient and outpatient surgery procedures and emergency department admissions.5 On December 5, 2013, the New York State Department of Health made hospital-specific average costs for over 300 diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) available publicly on its website.6 Among the selected DRGs were total hip (301) and total knee (302) arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a relationship between quality (as indicated by readmission rate) and either volume of procedures performed or cost of performing those procedures.

BACKGROUND:Private hospital rooms have a number of potential advantages compared to shared rooms, including reduced noise and increased control over the hospital environment. However, the association of room type with patient experience metrics in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients is currently unclear. METHODS:For private versus shared rooms, we compared our institutional Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores in patients who underwent primary TJA over a 2-year period. Regression model odds ratios (ORs) were adjusted for surgeon, date of surgery, and length of stay. RESULTS:Patients in private rooms were more likely to report a top-box score for overall hospital rating (85.6% vs 79.4%, OR = 1.53, P = .011), hospital recommendation (89.3% vs 83.0%, OR = 1.78, P = .002), call button help (76.0% vs 68.7%, OR = 1.40, P = .028), and quietness (70.4% vs 59.0%, OR = 1.78, P < .001). There were no significant differences on surgeon metrics including listening (P = .225), explanations (P = .066), or treatment with courtesy and respect (P = .396). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:For patients undergoing TJA, private hospital rooms were associated with superior performance on patient experience metrics. This association appears specific for global and hospital-related metrics, with little impact on surgeon evaluations. With the utilization of HCAHPS data in value-based initiatives, placement of TJA patients in private rooms may lead to increased reimbursement and higher hospital rankings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, retrospective cohort.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of Medicare claims and procedure details from a single institution participation in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program. OBJECTIVE:To analyze the effects of the BPCI program on patient outcome metrics and cost data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:The BPCI program was designed to improve the value of care provided to patients, but the financial consequences of this system remain largely unknown. We present two years of data from participation in the lumbar spine fusion bundle at a large, urban, academic institution. METHODS:In 2013 and 2014, all Medicare patients undergoing lumbar spine fusions for DGR 459 (spinal fusion except cervical with MCC) and 460 (without MCC) at our institution were enrolled in the BPCI program. We compared the BPCI cohort to a baseline cohort of patients under the same DRGs from 2009 to 2012 from which the target price was established. RESULTS:350 patients were enrolled into the BPCI program, while the baseline group contained 518 patients. When compared to the baseline cohort, length of stay decreased (4.58 +/- 2.51 vs 5.13 +/- 3.75; p = 0.009), readmission rate was unchanged, and discharges with HHA increased. Nonetheless, we were unable to effect an episode-based cost savings ($52,655 +/- 27,028 vs $48,913 +/- 24,764). In the larger DRG 460 group, total payments increased in the BPCI group ($51,105 +/- 26,347 vs $45,934 +/- 19,638, p = 0.001). Operative data demonstrated a more complex patient mix in the BPCI cohort. The use of interbody fusions increased from 2% to 16% (p < 0.001), and the percentage of complex spines increased from 23% to 45% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Increased case complexity was responsible for increasing costs relative to the negotiated baseline target price. This payment system may discourage advancement in spine surgery due to the financial penalty associated with novel techniques and technologies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3.

BACKGROUND:Smoking is associated with adverse outcomes after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), including periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Although preoperative smoking cessation interventions may help reduce the risk PJI, the short-term cost-effectiveness of these programs remains unclear. METHODS:Decision analysis was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a preoperative smoking cessation intervention over a 90-day TJA episode of care. Costs and probabilities were derived from literature review and published Medicare data. Thresholds for cost and efficacy of the intervention were determined using sensitivity analysis. RESULTS:In our model, the average 90-day cost was $32 less for patients enrolled in a mandatory smoking cessation intervention ($23,457) compared with patients who were not ($23,489). In sensitivity analyses, the smoking cessation intervention was cost-saving vs no intervention when the short-term cost of PJI was greater than $95,410, the rate of PJI was reduced by at least 25% for former vs current smokers, the cost of the intervention was less than $219, or the success rate of the intervention was greater than 56%. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Smoking cessation interventions prior to TJA can increase the value of care and are an important public health initiative. Routine referral to smoking cessation interventions should be considered for smokers indicated for TJA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level II, economic and decision analyses.

Alternative payment models are constantly evolving in an attempt to create value by decreasing cost while improving or maintaining quality. The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative was implemented in 2011, and many institutions have seen early success by using the seven pillars of total joint arthroplasty episode management. Private insurers have seen improvements in care and cost savings by adopting private bundle programs. In each organization, alignment among all stakeholders is paramount to the success of the bundled payment programs. Gainsharing offers a unique opportunity to incentivize physicians to change their care practices in an attempt to reduce costs and improve outcomes. As bundled payments evolve, the cooperation of physicians, health care institutions, payers, and patients will lead to value creation for all stakeholders.