Effect of surgery setting for outpatient shoulder procedures on early postoperative complications in a military population.

BACKGROUND: There has been a recent push to transition procedures previously performed at hospital-based outpatient surgical departments (HOPDs) to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). However, limited data regarding differences in early postoperative complications and care utilization (eg, emergency department visits and unplanned admissions) may drive increased overall costs or worse outcomes. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to examine differences in early 90-day adverse outcomes and postoperative emergency department visits associated with shoulder surgeries excluding arthroplasties that were performed in HOPDs and ASCs in a closed military health care system. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcomes between treatment settings. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records for 1748 elective shoulder surgeries from 2015 to 2020. Patients were considered as 1 of 2 cohorts depending on whether they underwent surgery in an ASC or HOPD setting. We evaluated groups for differences incomplexity, surgical time, and medical risk. Outcome measures were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions, and complications within the first 90 days after surgery. RESULTS: There was no difference in 90-day postoperative emergency department visits between procedures performed at HOPDs (n = 606) and ASCs (n = 1142). There was a slight increase in rate of unplanned hospital admission within 90 days after surgery in the HOPD cohort, most commonly for pain or overnight observation. The surgical time was significantly shorter (105 vs. 119 minutes, P < .01) at the ASC, but there was no difference in case complexity between the cohorts (P = .28). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that in appropriate patients, surgery in ASCs can be safely leveraged for its costs savings, efficiency, patient satisfaction, decreases in operative time, and potentially decreased resource utilization both during surgery and in the early postoperative period.

Trends in payments for facility and surgeon professional fees for shoulder surgeries performed at ambulatory surgery centers.

BACKGROUND: It has previously been demonstrated that utilization of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) results in cost savings and improved outcomes. Despite these benefits, Medicare reimbursement for professional fees at ASCs are decreasing over time. In this study, we sought to analyze the discrepancy between facility fee and professional fee reimbursements for ASCs by Medicare for common shoulder procedures over time. We hypothesized that professional fees for shoulder procedures would decrease over the study period while facility fees kept pace with inflation. METHODS: Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify shoulder specific procedures approved for ASCs by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopic and open categories. Publicly available data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was accessed via the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Lookup Tool and used to determine professional fee payments from 2018 to 2024. Additionally, Medicare ASC Payment Rates files were accessed to determine facility fee reimbursements to ASCs from 2018 to 2024. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and percent change over time. Compound annual growth rates were calculated and discrepancies in inflation were corrected for using the Consumer Price Index. The Benjamini and Hochberg method was used to correct P values in the setting of multiple comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 33 common shoulder procedures were included for analysis (10 arthroscopic codes and 23 open codes). Reimbursements for facility fees have remained significantly higher than corresponding professional fees for both open and arthroscopic procedures (P < .01). On average, facility fee reimbursements for common shoulder surgeries have risen on an annual basis in a manner consistent with inflation (P = .838). However, professional fees for these procedures have experienced a nearly uniform decline over the study period both nominally and in inflation-adjusted dollars (P = .064 and P = .005, respectively). CONCLUSION: Facility fee payments for outpatient approved shoulder surgeries have matched or outpaced inflation. Over the same time period, professional fee reimbursements for surgeons are consistently decreasing, both in absolute and inflation-adjusted dollars. Reform to the physician fee schedule is necessary to ensure that Medicare patients retain access to high-quality physician care.

Advanced Concepts in Outpatient Joint Arthroplasty.

As the adoption and utilization of outpatient total joint arthroplasty continues to grow, key developments have enabled surgeons to safely and effectively perform these surgeries while increasing patient satisfaction and operating room efficiency. Here, the authors will discuss the evidence-based principles that have guided this paradigm shift in joint arthroplasty surgery, as well as practical methods for selecting appropriate candidates and optimizing perioperative care. There will be 5 core efficiency principles reviewed that can be used to improve organizational management, streamline workflow, and overcome barriers in the ambulatory surgery center. Finally, future directions in outpatient surgery at the ASC, including the merits of implementing robot assistance and computer navigation, as well as expanding indications for revision surgeries, will be debated.

The AAHKS Clinical Research Award: Extended Postoperative Oral Tranexamic Acid in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative tranexamic acid (TXA) use with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely accepted today. Recently, a few international groups have published on the safety and outcomes of extending TXA use in the postoperative period. Through a double-blinded, randomized control trial (RCT), we aimed to investigate the safety and clinical efficacy of extended postoperative oral TXA use in TKA performed in an American, free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: Based on a power analysis, 40 patients undergoing primary TKA were randomized into 2 groups: extended oral TXA versus placebo. Both groups received a standard 1g intravenous TXA dose prior to incision and at the time of closure. The extended TXA group received an additional 1.95 g oral TXA dose following ambulation the day of surgery, plus on postoperative days 1,2, and 3. Patients who had a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or cancer were excluded. All patients received 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for VTE prophylaxis. Patients were followed on postoperative day 3 and weeks 2 and 6. Paired t-tests determined statistical significance. RESULTS: Extended TXA patients showed significantly increased knee flexion at 6 weeks (116.05 versus 106.5, P = .0308), improved VAS at 2 (2.5 versus 3.85, P = .039) and 6 weeks (1.35 versus 2.8, P = .011), and superior KOOS JR at 2 (66.87 versus 60.63, P = .03) and 6 weeks (73.33 versus 62.47, P = .0019) compared to placebo patients. No significant differences were found for changes in hemoglobin levels at any time points. No significant differences were found at 12 weeks for any clinical endpoints. No adverse events were noted in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to placebo, the extended use of oral TXA in the postoperative period may safely result in improved motion, pain, and functional scores. Further investigation into 1-to-2-year outcomes, as well as the duration and dose of postoperative TXA use is warranted.

Same Day Discharge Total Knee Arthroplasty: Hospital Demonstrates Similar Outcomes to Ambulatory Surgery Center in a More Complex Patient Population.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between patients undergoing same-day discharge (SDD) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at an ambulatory surgery center (ASC) versus a tertiary care university hospital setting. METHODS: A single tertiary academic center's institutional database was reviewed for patients who underwent primary TKA and were discharged the same day from August 2021 to January 2024. Patients who did not have at least 1 year of follow-up were excluded. Patient demographics, comorbidities, patient-reported outcome measures, emergency department visits, admissions, reoperations, and revisions were collected. Patients were stratified by the location of their surgery: ASC versus hospital. Specific criteria had to be met prior to surgery at the ASC, and the final decision regarding the location of surgery was made via shared decision-making between the patient and their surgeon. Patients who did not meet ASC criteria underwent TKA at the main hospital. Univariable analyses were used to compare groups, and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine if surgical location was a significant factor. Of the 449 TKAs meeting inclusion criteria, 63.3% (284) were performed at the ASC and 36.7% (165) at the university hospital at a mean follow-up of 1.51 years (range, 1.00 to 2.40). Of those 165 whose surgery was done at the hospital, 93.9% met at least one ASC exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Patients whose TKA was done at the hospital had significantly higher weight (P = 0.003), body mass index (P < 0.001), Elixhauser comorbidity index (P < 0.001), proportion of patients who had an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of 3 (P = 0.023), and proportion of patients who required general anesthesia (P < 0.001). Additionally, patients whose TKA was done at the hospital had higher preoperative patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) pain interference (PI) (62.0 [59.0, 66.0] versus 63.0 [61.8, 67.0]; P = 0.006), and lower physical function (PF) (39.0 [36.0, 43.0] versus 38.0 [34.0, 41.0]; P = 0.001). At 1 year, however, patients in both groups had similar PROMIS PI (53.0 [49.0, 59.0] versus 54.0 [44.0, 59.0]; P = 0.785) and PROMIS PF (47.0 [42.0, 51.0] versus 47.0 [41.0, 50.0]; P = 0.422) scores as well as similar rates of achieving minimum clinically important difference for PROMIS PI (64.4 versus 71.4%; P = 0.336) and PROMIS PF (60.5 versus 71.4%; P = 0.124). They also had a similar number of emergency department visits and admissions at 30 and 90 days, as well as similar reoperation-free (92.0 versus 93.3%; P = 0.79) and revision-free (95.5 versus 99.4%; P = 0.59) survival at 2 years CONCLUSIONS: Although ASCs have strict patient criteria for SDD TKA, complex patients at a tertiary university hospital can be sent home the same day with equivalent outcomes. Therefore, unhealthier patients can safely achieve SDD without compromising outcomes if done in the appropriate setting.

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Outpatient Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Ambulatory Surgery Center: A Matched-Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anesthesia is the predominant regimen in outpatient total joint arthroplasty (TJA), but induction often is unsuccessful, unobtainable, or against patient preference. We compared outcomes of same-day discharge (SDD) TJA with spinal versus general anesthesia in a free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: We took 105 general anesthesia TJA and one-to-one nearest-neighbor matched them to 105 spinal anesthesia TJA over 7 years at 1 ASC. The rate of successful SDD, minutes to discharge, postoperative pain and nausea, and 90-day complications were compared. Postanesthesia care unit outcomes were additionally stratified by spinal anesthetic (mepivacaine versus bupivacaine). RESULTS: All spinal anesthetic patients underwent SDD compared with 103 (98%) general anesthetic patients (P = .498). Mepivacaine spinal anesthesia patients spent the fewest minutes in postanesthesia care unit prior to discharge from the facility (206), followed by general anesthesia (227), and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia (291; P < .001). General anesthesia patients had the highest levels of pain at 1 hour (5.2 versus 1.5 versus 1.5) and 2 hours (3.2 versus 2.0 versus 1.3) postoperatively, and rates of nausea (48 versus 22 versus 28%) compared with mepivacaine and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia, respectively. The 90-day complications (6 versus 7), admissions (1 versus 3), and reoperations (5 versus 2) were similar among spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (P ≥ .445). CONCLUSIONS: Both spinal and general anesthesia led to reliable SDD with similar 90-day complication rates. General anesthesia facilitated faster discharge from the ASC compared with bupivacaine spinal anesthesia but led to higher levels of pain and incidence of nausea postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Comparison.

Early peripheral vascular interventions for claudication are associated with higher rates of late interventions and progression to chronic limb threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite societal guidelines that peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) should not be the first-line therapy for intermittent claudication, a significant number of patients will undergo PVI for claudication within 6 months of diagnosis. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association of early PVI for claudication with subsequent interventions. METHODS: We evaluated 100% of Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of claudication from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. The primary outcome was late intervention, defined as any femoropopliteal PVI performed >6 months after the claudication diagnosis (through June 30, 2021). Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare the cumulative incidence of late PVI for claudication patients with early (≤6 months) PVI vs those without early PVI. A hierarchical Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with late PVIs. RESULTS: A total of 187,442 patients had a new diagnosis of claudication during the study period, of whom 6069 (3.2%) had undergone early PVI. After a median follow-up of 4.39 years (interquartile range, 3.62-5.17 years), 22.5% of the early PVI patients had undergone late PVI vs 3.6% of those without early PVI (P < .001). Patients treated by high use physicians of early PVI (≥2 standard deviations; physician outliers) were more likely to have received late PVI than were patients treated by standard use physician of early PVI (9.8% vs 3.9%; P < .001). Patients who had undergone early PVI (16.4% vs 7.8%) and patients treated by outlier physicians (9.7% vs 8.0%) were more likely to have developed CLTI (P < .001 for both). After adjustment, the patient factors associated with late PVI included receipt of early PVI (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 6.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.42-7.40) and Black race (vs White; aHR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.10-1.30). The only physician factor associated with late PVI was a majority of practice in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory, with an increasing proportion of ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory services associated with significantly increased rates of late PVI (quartile 4 vs quartile 1; aHR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.41-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Early PVI after the diagnosis of claudication was associated with higher late PVI rates compared with early nonoperative management. High use physicians of early PVI for claudication performed more late PVIs than did their peers, especially those primarily delivering care in high reimbursement settings. The appropriateness of early PVI for claudication needs critical evaluation, as do the incentives surrounding the delivery of these interventions in ambulatory intervention suites.

Reprint of: Early peripheral vascular interventions for claudication are associated with higher rates of late interventions and progression to chronic limb threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite societal guidelines that peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) should not be the first-line therapy for intermittent claudication, a significant number of patients will undergo PVI for claudication within 6 months of diagnosis. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association of early PVI for claudication with subsequent interventions. METHODS: We evaluated 100% of Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of claudication from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. The primary outcome was late intervention, defined as any femoropopliteal PVI performed >6 months after the claudication diagnosis (through June 30, 2021). Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare the cumulative incidence of late PVI for claudication patients with early (≤6 months) PVI vs those without early PVI. A hierarchical Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with late PVIs. RESULTS: A total of 187,442 patients had a new diagnosis of claudication during the study period, of whom 6069 (3.2%) had undergone early PVI. After a median follow-up of 4.39 years (interquartile range, 3.62-5.17 years), 22.5% of the early PVI patients had undergone late PVI vs 3.6% of those without early PVI (P < .001). Patients treated by high use physicians of early PVI (≥2 standard deviations; physician outliers) were more likely to have received late PVI than were patients treated by standard use physician of early PVI (9.8% vs 3.9%; P < .001). Patients who had undergone early PVI (16.4% vs 7.8%) and patients treated by outlier physicians (9.7% vs 8.0%) were more likely to have developed CLTI (P < .001 for both). After adjustment, the patient factors associated with late PVI included receipt of early PVI (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 6.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.42-7.40) and Black race (vs White; aHR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.10-1.30). The only physician factor associated with late PVI was a majority of practice in an ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory, with an increasing proportion of ambulatory surgery center or office-based laboratory services associated with significantly increased rates of late PVI (quartile 4 vs quartile 1; aHR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.41-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Early PVI after the diagnosis of claudication was associated with higher late PVI rates compared with early nonoperative management. High use physicians of early PVI for claudication performed more late PVIs than did their peers, especially those primarily delivering care in high reimbursement settings. The appropriateness of early PVI for claudication needs critical evaluation, as do the incentives surrounding the delivery of these interventions in ambulatory intervention suites.

Costs of shoulder and elbow procedures are significantly reduced in ambulatory surgery centers compared to hospital outpatient departments.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has shown the advantages of outpatient surgery for many shoulder and elbow procedures, including cost savings with equivalent safety in appropriately selected patients. Two common settings for outpatient surgeries are ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which function as independent financial and administrative entities, or hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), which are owned and operated by hospital systems. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder and elbow surgery costs between ASCs and HOPDs. METHODS: Publicly available data from 2022 provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup Tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify shoulder and elbow procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopy, fracture, or miscellaneous. Total costs, facility fees, Medicare payments, patient payment (costs not covered by Medicare), and surgeon's fees were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Cost differences were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Fifty-seven CPT codes were identified. Arthroscopy procedures (n = 16) at ASCs had significantly lower total costs ($2667 ± $989 vs. $4899 ± $1917; P = .009), facility fees ($1974 ± $819 vs. $4206 ± $1753; P = .008), Medicare payments ($2133 ± $791 vs. $3919 ± $1534; P = .009), and patient payments ($533 ± $198 vs. $979 ± $383; P = .009) compared with HOPDs. Fracture procedures (n = 10) at ASCs had lower total costs ($7680 ± $3123 vs. $11,335 ± $3830; P = .049), facility fees ($6851 ± $3033 vs. $10,507 ± $3733; P = .047), and Medicare payments ($6143 ± $2499 vs. $9724 ± $3676; P = .049) compared with HOPDs, although patient payments were not significantly different ($1535 ± $625 vs. $1610 ± $160; P = .449). Miscellaneous procedures (n = 31) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4202 ± $2234 vs. $6985 ± $2917; P < .001), facility fees ($3348 ± $2059 vs. $6132 ± $2736; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3361 ± $1787 vs. $5675 ± $2635; P < .001), and patient payments ($840 ± $447 vs. $1309 ± $350; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. The combined cohort (n = 57) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4381 ± $2703 vs. $7163 ± $3534; P < .001), facility fees ($3577 ± $2570 vs. $6539.1 ± $3391; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3504 ± $2162 vs. $5892 ± $3206; P < .001), and patient payments ($875 ± $540 vs. $1269 ± $393; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. CONCLUSION: Shoulder and elbow procedures performed at HOPDs for Medicare recipients were found to have average total cost increase of 164% compared with those performed at ASCs (184% savings for arthroscopy, 148% for fracture, and 166% for miscellaneous). ASC use conferred lower facility fees, patient payments, and Medicare payments. Policy efforts to incentivize migration of surgeries to ASCs may translate into substantial health care cost savings.

Outpatient Total Knee Arthroplasty From a Stand-Alone Surgery Center: Safe as the Hospital?

BACKGROUND: Literature suggests that outpatient arthroplasty may result in low rates of complications and readmissions. There is, however, a dearth of information on the relative safety of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed at stand-alone ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) versus hospital outpatient (HOP) settings. We aimed to compare safety profiles and 90-day adverse events of these 2 cohorts. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were reviewed on all patients who underwent outpatient TKA from 2015 to 2022. The ASC and HOP groups were compared, and differences in demographics, complications, reoperations, revisions, readmissions, and emergency department (ED) visits within 90 days of surgery were analyzed. There were 4 surgeons who performed 4,307 TKAs during the study period, including 740 outpatient cases (ASC = 157; HOP = 583). The ASC patients were younger than HOP patients (ASC = 61 versus HOP = 65; P < .001). Body mass index and sex did not differ significantly between groups. RESULTS: Within 90 days, 44 (6%) complications occurred. No differences were observed between groups in rates of 90-day complications (ASC = 9 of 157, 5.7% versus HOP = 35 of 583, 6.0%; P = .899), reoperations (ASC = 2 of 157, 1.3% versus HOP = 3 of 583, 0.5%; P = .303), revisions (ASC = 0 of 157 versus HOP = 3 of 583, 0.5%; P = 1), readmissions (ASC = 3 of 157, 1.9% versus HOP = 8 of 583, 1.4%; P = .625), and ED visits (ASC = 1 of 157, 0.6% versus HOP = 3 of 583, 0.5%; P = .853). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that in appropriately selected patients, outpatient TKA can be safely performed in both ASC and HOP settings with similar low rates of 90-day complications, reoperations, revisions, readmissions, and ED visits.

Ambulatory shoulder arthroplasty provides a mild reduction in overall cost compared with inpatient shoulder arthroplasty cost of ambulatory shoulder arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine the relative cost difference of inpatient vs. ambulatory total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) procedures. METHODS: A retrospective case series was performed to identify a consecutive series of patients who underwent primary anatomic or reverse TSA at 2 orthopedic specialty hospitals between September 2015 and August 2020. Those undergoing surgery for fracture or revision were excluded. Itemized facility costs were analyzed with a time-driven activity-based costing model and compared between ambulatory and non-ambulatory procedures. Ambulatory patients were defined as those admitted and discharged on the same calendar day. All other patients were considered non-ambulatory. RESULTS: A total of 1027 patients were analyzed, comprising 38 ambulatory patients (3.7%) and 989 non-ambulatory patients (96.3%). There was a higher proportion of anatomic TSA than reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the ambulatory group (81.6% vs. 51.7%, P < .0001). Overall, there was no difference in cost between the 2 groups ($8832 vs. $8841, P = .97). However, personnel costs were greater in the non-same-day group ($1895 vs. $2743, P < .0001) whereas supply costs were less ($6937 vs. $6097, P < .0003). When implant costs were excluded, outpatient shoulder arthroplasty provided a cost savings of $745. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory shoulder arthroplasty provides a mild cost savings of $745 after controlling for fixed costs. This is much less dramatic than previously reported and should raise concern as shoulder arthroplasty continues to be targeted by payers as a potential for cost savings through decreased reimbursement.

Safety and short-term outcomes of anatomic vs. reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in an ambulatory surgery center.

BACKGROUND: A scarcity of literature exists comparing outcomes of outpatient anatomic (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). This study was performed to compare early outcomes between the 2 procedures in a freestanding ambulatory surgery center (ASC) and to determine if the addition of preoperative interscalene nerve block (ISNB) with periarticular liposomal bupivacaine injection (PAI) in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) would improve outcomes over PAI alone. METHODS: Medical charts of all patients undergoing outpatient primary aTSA or rTSA at 2 ASCs from 2012 to 2020 were reviewed. A total of 198 patients were ultimately identified (117 aTSA and 81 rTSA) to make up this retrospective cohort study. Patient demographics, PACU outcomes, complications, readmissions, reoperations, calls to the office, and unplanned clinic visit rates were compared between procedures. PACU outcomes were compared between those receiving ISNB with PAI and those receiving PAI alone. RESULTS: Patients undergoing rTSA were older (61.1 vs. 55.7 years, P < .001) and more likely to have American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 3 (51.9% vs. 41.0%, P = .050) compared to patients having aTSA. No patient required an overnight stay. Time in the PACU before discharge (89.1 vs. 95.6 minutes, P = .231) and pain scores at discharge (3.0 vs. 3.0, P = .815) were similar for aTSA and rTSA, respectively. One intraoperative complication occurred in the aTSA group (posterior humeral circumflex artery injury) and 1 in the rTSA group (calcar fracture) (P = .793). Ninety-day postoperative total complication (7.7% vs. 7.4%), shoulder-related complication (6.0% vs. 6.2%), medical-related complication (1.7% vs. 1.2%), admission (0.8% vs. 2.5%), reoperation (2.6% vs. 1.2%), and unplanned clinic visit (6.0% vs. 6.1%) rates were similar between aTSA and rTSA, respectively (P ≥ .361 for all comparisons). At 1 year, there were 8 reoperations and 15 complications in the aTSA group compared with 1 reoperation and 8 complications in the rTSA group (P = .091 and P = .818, respectively). Patients who had ISNB spent less time in PACU (75 vs. 97 minutes, P < .001), had less pain at discharge (0.2 vs. 3.9, P < .001), and consumed less oral morphine equivalents in the PACU (1.2 vs. 16.6 mg, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative outcomes and complication rates were similar between the 2 groups, and all patients were successfully discharged home the day of surgery. The addition of preoperative ISNB led to more efficient discharge from the ASC with less pain in the PACU.

The Safety Profile of Same-Day Outpatient Total Ankle Arthroplasty.

There has been significant change in the health care policy in the United States in recent years with an increasing focus on health care costs and patient satisfaction. One strategy of cost containment is to transition outpatient surgery away from high cost hospital environments. Total ankle arthroplasty has begun the evolution to outpatient settings; however, there is limited published literature on the results of outpatient total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). The purpose of the present study was to review the safety profile of same day outpatient TAA at an ambulatory surgery center. A review of consecutive patients who underwent same day outpatient TAA for end-stage ankle arthritis with a minimum of 12 months' follow-up was performed. The primary outcomes assessed were the incidence of perioperative adverse medical events, hospital admissions related to the procedure, and postoperative complications (minor and major). Univariate analyses were performed. Fifty-one patients who underwent same-day TAA between June 2016 and July 2018 were included; mean follow-up was 20.7 months (± 7.6). The mean age at time of surgery was 56.5 years (± 7.2), with a mean body mass index of 30.4 (± 5.3). Overall, there were no perioperative adverse medical events or hospital admissions related to the procedure. Five minor complications (9.8%) and 7 major (13.7%) were recorded. Of the major complications, only 1 required TAA revision. Implant survivorship during the most recent follow-up was 98%. The present study suggests that TAA can be performed safely in an outpatient ambulatory setting. Additional comparative studies with larger TAA cohorts and patient reported outcomes are warranted.

Improved efficiency of sialendoscopy procedures at an ambulatory surgery center.

OBJECTIVES: To compare time spent on day of surgery and post-surgical outcomes for sialendoscopy procedures at an ambulatory surgery center versus in a hospital operating room. METHODS: Retrospective chart review for patients who underwent sialendoscopy for sialadenitis or sialolithiasis from March 2017 to May 2020 were included. Surgery location (ambulatory surgery center or hospital operating room) was compared. Primary outcomes included total time in hospital, operative time, total time in operating room. and recovery time. Secondary outcomes included rate of symptoms resolutions, requiring further medical management, and requiring further surgical intervention. RESULTS: A total of 321 procedures were included. Sialendoscopy in an ambulatory surgery center compared to main operating room decreased median hospital time (166 min reduction, p < 0.001), operative time (18 min reduction, p < 0.001), total time in operating room (34 min reduction, p < 0.001), and recovery time (64 min reduction, p < 0.001). Sialendoscopy in an ambulatory surgery center had similar rates of post-operative resolution of symptoms and further medical or surgical intervention compared to procedures in a hospital operating room. CONCLUSION: Sialendoscopy can be safely performed in an ambulatory surgery center for sialadenitis or appropriate sialolithiasis cases while decreasing hospital time, operative time, total time in operating room time, and recovery time.

Out-of-Network Facility Charges for Patients Undergoing Outpatient Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of outpatient (OP) total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is increasing. Although many arthroplasty surgeons and hospitals have longstanding agreements with insurance companies, it may take time for ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) to establish in-network agreements. The purposes of this study are to investigate trends in out-of-network facility charges for OP-TJA, as well as compare rates of out-of-network facilities between ASC and hospital outpatient department (HOPD) OP-TJA. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of the MarketScan commercial claims database of OP-TJAs (same-day discharge) performed at ASCs or HOPDs from 2007 to 2017. Detailed demographic, geographic, operative, insurance, temporal, and financial details were collected. Out-of-network facility utilization was trended over time. Adjusted regressions compared the prevalence of out-of-network facilities between ASCs and HOPDs. RESULTS: There were 13,031 OP-TJA patients (58.8% total knee arthroplasty). Utilization of out-of-network facilities significantly decreased over time, from 27.8% of surgeries in 2007 to 9.5% in 2017 (Ptrend < .001); however, this was non-linear with a significant increase in 2013-2015 corresponding to rising use of out-of-network ASCs. Patients treated at ASCs were significantly more likely to be out-of-network than those treated at HOPDs (odds ratio 4.88, 95% confidence interval 4.28-5.57, P < .001; odds ratio 7.70, 95% confidence interval 6.42-9.25, P < .001 among the 11,870 patients with in-network surgeons). About 10.4% of patients with in-network surgeons were treated at out-of-network facilities. CONCLUSION: Although the utilization of out-of-network facilities has decreased, over 10% of patients with in-network surgeons face out-of-network facility charges, which may often come as a surprise. Efforts are warranted to reduce the out-of-network facility burden for OP-TJA patients, including accelerating insurance contracting and reviewing patients' coverage statuses.

Mepivacaine vs Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty at an Ambulatory Surgery Center.

BACKGROUND: Mepivacaine spinal anesthetic may facilitate more rapid postoperative recovery in joint arthroplasty than bupivacaine. This study compared recovery, pain, and complications between the 2 anesthetics in anterior-approach total hip arthroplasty (THA) at a free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of 282 consecutive patients with mean age 55.7 ± 8.8 years and body mass index 30.6 ± 5.3 who underwent THA at an ASC from November 2018 to July 2020 compares mepivacaine (n = 141) vs bupivacaine (n = 141) spinal anesthesia, a transition made in March 2019. The main outcomes were length of stay in the postoperative unit (post acute care unit) prior to same-day discharge (SDD), time to controlled void, and ambulation. Secondarily, postoperative pain scores (0-10) with morphine equivalents were required and any postoperative complications were compared. RESULTS: Mepivacaine decreased mean post acute care unit stay (4.0 vs 5.7 hours, P < .001), time to void (3.1 vs 4.9 hours, P < .001), and ambulation (3.2 vs 4.5 hours, P < .001). No patients needed urinary catheterization or overnight stay. Two patients in the bupivacaine group had transient neurologic symptoms, consisting of foot drop and spinal headache, compared to none with mepivacaine (P = .498). Mepivacaine patients had increased postoperative pain at 2 hours (1.7 vs 0.9, P < .001), at discharge (1.1 vs 0.5, P = .004), and morphine equivalent doses received (7.8 vs 3.7 mg, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Mepivacaine spinal anesthesia for anterior-approach THA safely facilitated more rapid SDD from the ASC through decreased times to controlled void and ambulation with only minor increase in pain when compared to bupivacaine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III - Retrospective comparative cohort study.

Outpatient Hip Safety in an Ambulatory Surgery Center Is Independent of Approach.

BACKGROUND: There are few data comparing the direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior approach (PA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day complications between the 2 approaches. We hypothesized that they would be equally safe and effective. METHODS: Retrospective review identified 432 THAs (346 DAA, 86 PA) performed at a single ambulatory surgery center (ASC). Outcomes compared included demographics, comorbidities, preoperative and discharge pain scores (visual analog scale [VAS]), overall time spent in the ASC, overnight stay, emergency room visits, admission, reoperation, and complications within a 90-day period. RESULTS: There were no differences in mean preoperative VAS (DAA 4.7, PA 4.5), mean discharge VAS (DAA 0.8, PA 0.7), overall time spent in the ASC (DAA 9.0 hours, PA 9.3 hours), total number of overnight stays (DAA 0.9%, PA 1.2%), emergency room visits (DAA 1.7%, PA 1.2%), admissions (DAA 1.4%, PA 1.2%), reoperations (DAA 1.4%, PA 1.2%), or complications (DAA 3.5%, PA 2.3%). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the safety outcomes, and overall there were few complications in the 90-day period, regardless of the surgeon's preferred approach. This study indicates both DAA and PA are equally safe for THA in the outpatient setting, and the choice of surgical approach should be based on patient and surgeon preference.

Outpatient Total Joint Arthroplasty: The New Reality.

As perioperative protocols have improved, there has been a reduction in the rates of key complications after hip and knee arthroplasty. Likewise, as we have been able to make patients more comfortable postoperatively, hospital length of stay has decreased and in some centers, hip and knee arthroplasty is now routinely performed as an outpatient. While the number of surgeons offering this option and patients choosing to have procedures performed as an outpatient grows, many questions revolve around this movement. This article will review the data supporting outpatient arthroplasty, the business and legal aspects involved, if surgeons can align with their hospital to offer these services, and how tightly knit and highly organized teams are key to the success of safely offering hip and knee arthroplasty on an outpatient basis.

Improving Arthroplasty Efficiency and Quality Through Concentrating Service Volume by Complexity: Surviving the Medicare Policy Changes.

We have an academic medical center (AMC), an associated community-based hospital (CBH) and several ambulatory care centers which are being prepared to provide same day discharge (SDD) total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The near-capacity AMC cared for medically and technically complicated TJA patients. The CBH wanted to increase volume, improve margins, and become a center of excellence with an efficient hospital outpatient department and SDD TJA experience. METHODS: We transitioned primary, uncomplicated TJA, UKA, and minimally invasive TJA to the CBH. Revision surgeries, patients with extensive comorbidities, and complex primaries were performed at the AMC. Protocols were developed to facilitate SDD UKA and total hip arthroplasty (THA) as well as rapid recovery protocols for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at both hospitals. A protocol-based system was put in place to make both hospitals ready for the removal of TKA from the Inpatient-Only list to avoid Quality Improvement Organization and possible resultant Recovery Audit Contractor audits if referred after implementation. RESULTS: The CBH volume increased 36.7% (+239). AMC volume slightly decreased (-0.46%, -5) resulting in an increase in margin contribution for the system. CBH quality metrics (surgical site infections, length of stay, readmissions, and mortality) were improved. Surgeon satisfaction improved as their volume, efficiency, quality metrics, and finances were enhanced. Although CBH per case revenue was 80.3% and 74.4% of the AMC for THA and TKA, net margins were 3.6% and 18.8% higher for THA and TKA, respectively. Increased efficiency, lower hospital cost, and higher volume at the CBH allowed for an increase in revenue despite lower reimbursement per case. CONCLUSION: This strategy will help hospital systems improve net margins while improving patient care despite lower net revenue per TJA episode. These strategies will become increasingly important going forward with the transition of higher numbers of TJA patients to outpatient which will be subjected to further decreases in net revenue per patient.

SCAI position statement on the performance of percutaneous coronary intervention in ambulatory surgical centers.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began reimbursement for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed in ambulatory surgical centers (ASC) in January 2020. The ability to perform PCI in an ASC has been made possible due to the outcomes data from observational studies and randomized controlled trials supporting same day discharge (SDD) after PCI. In appropriately selected patients for outpatient PCI, clinical outcomes for SDD or routine overnight observation are comparable without any difference in short-term or long-term adverse events. Furthermore, a potential for lower cost of care without a compromise in clinical outcomes exists. These studies provide the framework and justification for performing PCI in an ASC. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) supported this coverage decision provided the quality and safety standards for PCI in an ASC were equivalent to the hospital setting. The current position paper is written to provide guidance for starting a PCI program in an ASC with an emphasis on maintaining quality standards. Regulatory requirements and appropriate standards for the facility, staff and physicians are delineated. The consensus document identified appropriate patients for consideration of PCI in an ASC. The key components of an ongoing quality assurance program are defined and the ethical issues relevant to PCI in an ASC are reviewed.