RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Measuring costs across entire episodes of care, time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) has recently been described as a novel cost accounting arm of value-based care organizations. Lean methodology is a system used to understand pathways of care at a granular level, allowing for standardization. The current work presents an attempt at combining the 2 methodologies to detect meaningful variation in a patient's care following single-level spine fusion. The objective of this study was to evaluate the combination of TDABC and lean methodologies in detecting meaningful variability in time-based care in patients undergoing single-level spine fusion surgery. METHODS: This study is a consecutive case series of patients who underwent single-level spine fusion performed by 1 of 5 fellowship-trained spine surgeons. Patients were diagnosed with either lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis. Additional inclusion criteria included inpatient stays from 1 to 3 days, discharge to home, and no readmission within 30 days of surgery. Patient demographic data were obtained. Time spent on activities for each personnel role was aggregated in 15-minute increments occurring preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. Patients were analyzed in 3 groups based on the duration of their in-hospital stay. RESULTS: Patients discharged on postoperative day (POD) 3 had statistically significantly more total time spent than those discharged on POD 2. Patients discharged on POD 1 had less total time than those in the former 2 groups. The amount of time spent with patients did not differ for personnel in either preoperative or postanesthesia care unit phases of care. There was a statistically significant difference in time spent in surgery for surgeons, anesthesia attendings, circulators, and scrub technicians. CONCLUSIONS: In a healthcare setting run by lean methodology, TDABC may detect meaningful variability in an episode of care for single-level spine fusion. Clinicians and administrators can use this combination to allocate costs appropriately, optimize value care streams, and help improve patient care.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) has been suggested as the cost-accounting arm of value-based care organizations seeking to address costing challenges from the bottom up by studying the actual processes used in patient care. Lean methodology is a system in which the care pathway is understood at a granular level. In the current study, we attempt to combine these 2 methodologies, providing a robust mechanism to detect meaningful variation. First, we used data from a single surgeon and examined differences in time and cost for patients released on postoperative days 1 or 2. Next, we compared the data from patients discharged on postoperative day 1 with those of patients who underwent an operation by a different surgeon and were also discharged on postoperative day 1. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent an anterior hip arthroplasty performed by 1 of 2 surgeons and who had degenerative pathology of the hip, an inpatient stay of 1 or 2 days, discharge to home, and no readmission within 30 days of the surgical procedure were identified. We obtained data on patient demographic characteristics and time spent on activities for each personnel role in 15-minute increments occurring during 4 time points of a surgical episode of care (preoperative bay, surgical procedure, post-anesthesia care unit, and inpatient). Personnel costs were set as a ratio relative to the cost of a registered nurse (RN). RESULTS: Consistent with our hypotheses, both RNs and nursing assistants-certified (NA-Cs) spent more time with patients released on postoperative day 2 compared with those released on postoperative day 1. Also consistent with our hypotheses, we only found significant differences for the time that personnel spent in the surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty for degenerative conditions, we demonstrate that, in the setting of lean methodology, TDABC can detect variability in a meaningful and predictable way. This combination may further enable clinicians and administrators to improve processes, to allocate appropriate resources to specific process steps, and to optimize various treatments across episodes of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
