Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:For patients who wish to undergo bariatric surgery, variation in pre-operative insurance requirements may represent inequity across insurance plan types. We conducted a cross-sectional assessment of the variation in pre-operative insurance requirements. METHODS:Original insurance policy documents for pre-operative requirements were obtained from bariatric surgery programs across the entire USA and online insurance portals. Insurance programs analyzed include commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare/TriCare plans. Poisson regression adjusting for U.S. Census region was used to evaluate variation in pre-operative requirements. Analyses were done at the insurance plan level. Our primary outcome was number of requirements required by each plan by insurance type. Our secondary outcome was number of months required to participate in medically supervised weight loss (MSWL). RESULTS:Among 43 insurance plans reviewed, representing commercial (60.5%), Medicaid (25.6%), and Medicare/TriCare (14.0%) plans, the number of pre-operative requirements ranged from 1 to 8. Adjusted Poisson regression showed significant variation in pre-operative requirements across plan types with Medicaid-insured patients required to fulfill the greatest number (4.1, 95%CI 2.7 to 5.4) compared to 2.7 (95%CI 2.2 to 3.2, P = 0.028) for commercially insured patients and 2.1 (95%CI 1.1 to 3.1, P = 0.047) for Medicare/TriCare-insured patients. Medicaid-insured patients were also required to complete a greater number of months in MSWL (6.6, 95%CI 5.5 to 7.6) compared to commercially (3.8, 95%CI 2.9 to 4.8, P < .001) and Medicare/TriCare-insured patients (1.7, 95%CI 0.3 to 3.0, P = .001). CONCLUSION:The greater frequency of pre-operative requirements in Medicaid plans compared to Medicare/TriCare and commercial plans demonstrates inequity across insurance types which may negatively impact access to bariatric surgery. Pre-operative insurance requirements must be reevaluated and standardized using established evidence to ensure all individuals have access to this life-saving intervention.

OBJECTIVE:To compare safety and healthcare utilization after sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in a national Medicare cohort. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:Though bariatric surgery is increasing among Medicare beneficiaries, no long-term, national studies examining comparative effectiveness between procedures exist. Bariatric outcomes are needed for shared decision-making and coverage policy concerns identified by the cMS Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee. METHODS:Retrospective instrumental variable analysis of Medicare claims (2012-2017) for 30,105 bariatric surgery patients entitled due to disability or age. We examined clinical safety outcomes (mortality, complications, and reinterventions), healthcare utilization [Emergency Department (ED) visits, rehospitalizations, and expenditures], and heterogeneity of treatment effect. We compared all outcomes between sleeve and bypass for each entitlement group at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. RESULTS:Among the disabled (n = 21,595), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year mortality [2.1% vs 3.2%, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.2% to -0.03%], complications (22.2% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.6%), reinterventions (20.1% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -4.6%), ED utilization (71.6% vs 77.1%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.4%), and rehospitalizations (47.4% vs 52.3%, ARR 95%Ci: -8.0% to -1.7%). Cumulative expenditures were $46,277 after sleeve and $48,211 after bypass (P = 0.22). Among the elderly (n = 8510), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year complications (20.1% vs 24.7%, ARR 95%CI: -7.6% to -1.7%), reinterventions (14.0% vs 21.9%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -5.2%), ED utilization (51.7% vs 57.2%, ARR 95%CI: -9.1% to -1.9%), and rehospitalizations (41.8% vs 45.8%, ARR 95%Ci: -7.5% to -0.5%). Expenditures were $38,632 after sleeve and $39,270 after bypass (P = 0.60). Procedure treatment effect significantly differed by entitlement for mortality, revision, and paraesophageal hernia repair. CONCLUSIONS:Bariatric surgery is safe, and healthcare utilization benefits of sleeve over bypass are preserved across both Medicare elderly and disabled subpopulations.

OBJECTIVE:To explore challenges and opportunities for surgery departments' academic missions as they become increasingly affiliated with expanding health systems. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:Academic medicine is in the midst of unprecedented change. In addition to facing intense competition, narrower margins, and decreased federal funding, medical schools are becoming increasingly involved with large, expanding health systems. The impact of these health system affiliations on surgical departments' academic missions is unknown. METHODS:Semistructured interviews with 30 surgical leaders at teaching hospitals affiliated with health systems from August - December 2019. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in an iterative process using MaxQDA software. The topic of challenges and opportunities for the academic mission was an emergent theme, analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS:Academic health systems typically expanded to support their business goals, rather than their academic mission. Changes in governance sometimes disempowered departmental leadership, shifted traditional compensation models, redirected research programs, and led to cultural conflict. However, at many institutions, health system growth cross-subsidized surgical departments' research and training missions, expanded their clinical footprint, enabled them to improve standards of care, and enhanced opportunities for researchers and trainees. CONCLUSIONS:Although health system expansion generally intended to advance business goals, the accompanying academic and clinical opportunities were not always fully captured. Alignment between medical school and health system goals enabled some surgical department leaders to take advantage of their health systems' reach and resources to support their academic missions.

BACKGROUND:Sleeve gastrectomy is now the most common bariatric operation performed. With lower volumes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), it is unclear whether decreasing surgeon experience has led to worsening outcomes for this procedure. METHODS:We used State Inpatient Databases from Florida, Iowa, New York, and Washington. Bariatric surgeons were designated as those who performed ten or more bariatric procedures yearly. Patients who had RYGB were included in our analysis. Using multi-level logistic regression, we examined whether surgeon average yearly RYGB volume was associated with RYGB patient 30-day complications, reoperations, and readmissions and 1-year revisions and readmissions. RESULTS:From 2013 to 2017 there were 27,714 patients who underwent laparoscopic RYGB by 311 surgeons. Median surgeon volume was 77 RYGBs per year. The distribution was 10 bypasses yearly at the 5th percentile, 16 bypasses at the 10th percentile, 38 bypasses at the 25th percentile, and 133 bypasses at the 75th percentile. Multi-level regression revealed that patients of surgeons with lower RYGB volumes had small but statistically significant increased risks of 30-day complications and 1-year readmissions. At 30 days, risk for any complication was 6.71%, 6.43%, and 5.55% at 10, 38, and 133 bypasses per year, respectively (p = 0.01). Risk for readmission at 1 year was 13.90%, 13.67%, and 12.90% at 10, 38, and 133 bypasses per year, respectively (p = 0.099). Of note, volume associations with complications and reoperations due to hemorrhage and leak were not statistically significant. There was also no significant association with revisions. CONCLUSION:This is the first study to examine the association of surgeon RYGB volume with patient outcomes as the national experience with RYGB diminishes. Overall, surgeon RYGB volume does not appear to have a large effect on patient outcomes. Thus, patients can safely pursue RYGB in this early phase of the sleeve gastrectomy era.

UNLABELLED:To estimate the nationwide prevalence of individualized out-of-pocket (OOP) price estimators at US hospitals, characterize patterns of inclusion of 14 specified "shoppable" surgical procedures, and determine hospital-level characteristics associated with estimators that include surgical procedures. BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Price transparency for shoppable surgical services is a key requirement of several recent federal policies, yet the extent to which hospitals provide online OOP price estimators remains unknown. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We reviewed a stratified random sample of 485 U.S. hospitals for the presence of a tool to allow patients to estimate individualized OOP expenses for healthcare services. We compared characteristics of hospitals that did and did not offer online price estimators and performed multivariable modeling to identify facility-level predictors of hospitals offering price estimator with and without surgical procedures. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Nearly two-thirds (66.0%) of hospitals in the final sample (95% confidence interval 61.6%-70.1%) offered an online tool for estimating OOP healthcare expenses. Approximately 58.5% of hospitals included at least one shoppable surgical procedure while around 6.6% of hospitals included all 14 surgical procedures. The most common price reported was laparoscopic cholecystectomy (55.1%), and the least common was recurrent cataract removal (20.0%). Inclusion of surgical procedures varied by total annual surgical volume and health system membership. Only 26.9% of estimators explicitly included professional fees. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Our findings highlight an ongoing progress in price transparency, as well as key areas for improvement in future policies to help patients make more financially informed decisions about their surgical care.

BACKGROUND:Even after decades of network expansion and increased care being delivered within health networks, health network expansion has not led to uniform improvements in patient outcomes and satisfaction. The reasons for the lack of universal surgical quality improvement are unclear. This study used qualitative methods to understand the nuances that affect the variation in network-level surgical quality assurance and provides strategies that surgical leaders use to improve surgical quality at expanding health networks. METHODS:This qualitative study obtained information through 30 semistructured interviews conducted from August to December 2019 with surgical leaders whose institutions were associated with health networks. The topic of surgical quality assurance was an emergent theme that was informed by thematic analysis. RESULTS:Interviews with leaders revealed 3 themes with regard to surgical quality assurance. First, participants wanted standardized tools for quality measurement. Leaders frequently referred to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry and shared electronic health records, but some networks did not have these available at all sites. Second, participants wanted an organizational structure that provides clear oversight over quality. Some leaders appointed executives or created committees to help manage quality improvement initiatives. Third, participants wanted a culture shift toward quality improvement. Many leaders faced resistance to quality initiatives from frontline clinicians; some implemented events and retreats to help garner support and a culture of quality. CONCLUSION:These interviews offer critical insights into 3 domains that can be leveraged for sustained improvement and detail strategies that leaders used for surgical quality assurance at hospital networks.

OBJECTIVE:To compare the safety of sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in a large cohort of commercially insured bariatric surgery patients from the IBM MarketScan claims database, while accounting for measurable and unmeasurable sources of selection bias in who is chosen for each operation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:Sleeve gastrectomy has rapidly become the most common bariatric operation performed in the United States, but its longer-term safety is poorly described, and the risk of worsening gastroesophageal reflux requiring revision may be higher than previously thought. Prior studies comparing sleeve gastrectomy to gastric bypass are limited by low sample size (in randomized trials) and selection bias (in observational studies). METHODS:Instrumental variables analysis of commercially insured patients in the IBM MarketScan claims database from 2011 to 2018. We studied patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2012 to 2016. We identified re-interventions and complications at 30 days and 2 years from surgery using Comprehensive Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9/10 codes. To overcome unmeasured confounding, we use the prior year's sleeve gastrectomy utilization within each state as an instrumental variable-exploiting variation in the timing of payers' decisions to cover sleeve gastrectomy as a natural experiment. RESULTS:Among 38,153 patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2012 and 2016, the share of sleeve gastrectomy rose from 52.6% (2012) to 75% (2016). At 2 years from surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had fewer re-interventions (sleeve 9.9%, bypass 15.6%, P < 0.001) and complications (sleeve 6.6%, bypass 9.6%, P = 0.001), and lower overall healthcare spending ($47,891 vs $55,213, P = 0.003), than patients undergoing gastric bypass. However, at the 2-year mark, revisions were slightly more common in sleeve gastrectomy than in gastric bypass (sleeve 0.6%, bypass 0.4%, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In a large cohort of commercially insured patients, sleeve gastrectomy had a superior safety profile to gastric bypass up to 2 years from surgery, even when accounting for selection bias. However, the higher risk of revisions in sleeve gastrectomy merits further exploration.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate sources of 90-day episode spending variation in Medicare patients undergoing bariatric surgery and whether spending variation was related to quality of care. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:Medicare's bundled payments for care improvement-advanced program includes the first large-scale episodic bundling program for bariatric surgery. This voluntary program will pay bariatric programs a bonus if 90-day spending after surgery falls below a predetermined target. It is unclear what share of bariatric episode spending may be due to unnecessary variation and thus modifiable through care improvement. METHODS:Retrospective analysis of fee-for-service Medicare claims data from 761 acute care hospitals providing inpatient bariatric surgery between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2016. We measured associations between patient and hospital factors, clinical outcomes, and total Medicare spending for the 90-day bariatric surgery episode using multivariable regression models. RESULTS:Of 64,537 patients, 46% underwent sleeve gastrectomy, 22% revisited the emergency department (ED) within 90 days, and 12.5% were readmitted. Average 90-day episode payments were $14,124, ranging from $12,220 at the lowest-spending quintile of hospitals to $16,887 at the highest-spending quintile. After risk adjustment, 90-day episode spending was $11,447 at the lowest quintile versus $15,380 at the highest quintile (difference $3932, P < 0.001). The largest components of spending variation were readmissions (44% of variation, or $2043 per episode), post-acute care (19% or $871), and index professional fees (15% or $450). The lowest spending hospitals had the lowest complication, ED visit, post-acute utilization, and readmission rates (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In this retrospective analysis of Medicare patients undergoing bariatric surgery, the largest components of 90-day episode spending variation are readmissions, inpatient professional fees, and post-acute care utilization. Hospitals with lower spending were associated with lower rates of complications, ED visits, post-acute utilization, and readmissions. Incentives for improving outcomes and reducing spending seem to be well-aligned in Medicare's bundled payment initiative for bariatric surgery.