Effects of Cost Sharing on Ophthalmic Care Utilization in the Affordable Care Act Marketplace.

PURPOSE: To determine the distribution and quantity of ophthalmic care consumed on Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans, the demographics of the population utilizing these services, and the relationship between ACA insurance coverage plan tier, cost sharing, and total cost of ophthalmic care consumed. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed ACA individual and small group market claims data from the Wakely Affordable Care Act (WACA) 2018 dataset, which contains detailed claims, enrollment, and premium data from Edge Servers for 3.9 million individual and small group market lives. We identified all enrollees with ophthalmology-specific billing, procedure, and national drug codes. We then analyzed the claims by plan type and calculated the total cost and out-of-pocket (OOP) cost. RESULTS: Among 3.9 million enrollees in the WACA 2018 dataset, 538,169 (13.7%) had claims related to ophthalmology procedures, medications, and/or diagnoses. A total of $203 million was generated in ophthalmology-related claims, with $54 million in general services, $42 million in medications, $20 million in diagnostics and imaging, and $86 million in procedures. Average annual OOP costs were $116 per member, or 30.9% of the total cost, and were lowest for members with platinum plans (16% OOP) and income-driven cost sharing reduction (ICSR) subsidies (17% OOP). Despite stable ocular disease distribution across plan types, beneficiaries with silver ICSR subsidies consumed more total care than any other plan, higher than platinum plan enrollees and almost 1.5× the cost of bronze plan enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmic care for enrollees on ACA plans generated substantial costs in 2018. Plans with higher OOP cost sharing may result in lower utilization of ophthalmic care.

Surgical Fixation Method in Lower Extremity Intercalary Allograft Reconstruction After Oncologic Resection: A Comparison of Plates and Nails.

INTRODUCTION: Fixation in intercalary allograft reconstruction includes plates and intramedullary nails. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of nonunion, fracture, the overall need for revision surgery, and allograft survival based on the surgical fixation method in lower extremity intercalary allografts. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 51 patients with intercalary allograft reconstruction in the lower extremity. Fixation methods compared were intramedullary fixation with nails (IMN) and extramedullary fixation with plates (EMP). Complications compared were nonunion, fracture, and wound complications. The alpha was set at 0.05 for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Nonunion incidence at all allograft-to-native bone junction sites was 21% (IMN) and 25% (EMP) ( P = 0.8). Fracture incidence was 24% (IMN) and 32% (EMP) ( P = 0.75). Median fracture-free allograft survival was 7.9 years (IMN) and 3.2 years (EMP) ( P = 0.04). Infection was seen in 18% (IMN) and 12% (EMP) ( P = 0.7). The overall need for revision surgery was 59% (IMN) and 71% (EMP) ( P = 0.53). Allograft survival at the final follow-up was 82% (IMN) and 65% (EMP) ( P = 0.33). When the EMP group was subdivided into single plate (SP) and multiple plate (MP) groups and compared with the IMN groups, fracture rates were 24% (IMN), 8% (SP), and 48% (MP) ( P = 0.04). Rates of revision surgery were 59% (IMN), 46% (SP), and 86% (MP) ( P = 0.04). Allograft survival at the final follow-up was 88% (IMN), 92% (SP), and 52% (MP) ( P = 0.05). DISCUSSION: Median fracture-free allograft survival was notably longer for the IMN group than the EMP group; otherwise, there were no notable differences between the intramedullary and extramedullary groups. When the EMP group was subdivided into the SP and MP groups, patients with MPs had higher rates of fracture, higher rates of revision surgery, and lower overall allograft survival. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Therapeutic Study, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Chronic Recurrent Multifocal Osteomyelitis: A Review of the Noninfectious Inflammatory Bone Disease and Lessons for More Timely Diagnosis.

Chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO) is an idiopathic autoinflammatory disease of the bone that typically occurs in children and adolescents. CRMO is characterized by recurrent periods of exacerbation and remission of symptomatic, osteolytic/sclerotic sterile bone lesions and is often a diagnosis of exclusion. Treatment consists of multimodal anti-inflammatory medication management by rheumatology and rarely involves surgery. This review summarizes the clinical presentation, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of this disease and highlights the role of the orthopedic surgeon. With increased familiarity with CRMO, clinicians will be able to diagnose and treat the condition in a more timely manner. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(3):e149-e155.].

Adjuvant Radiation after Primary Resection of Atypical Lipomatous Tumors of the Extremity Reduces Local Recurrence but Increases Complications: A Multicenter Evaluation.

Background: Radiation after resection of an atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT) is controversial. This study evaluates local control and complications after the first resection of ALTs of the extremity with or without adjuvant radiation. Methods: A dual institution, retrospective review of patients treated from 1995 to 2020 with first-time resection of an ALT in the extremity was performed. In total, 102 patients underwent adjuvant radiation (XRT group) and 68 patients were treated with surgery alone (no-XRT group). The median follow-up time was 4.6 years (interquartile range (IQR) 2.0-7.3 years). The median radiation dose was 60 Gy (IQR 55-66 Gy). Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated the association of patient, tumor, and treatment variables with recurrence and complications. Kaplan-Meier analysis evaluated local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and time to complication. Results: The overall incidence of local recurrence was 1% (1/102) in the XRT group and 24% (16/68) in the no-XRT group (p < 0.001). The median time-to-recurrence was 8.2 years (IQR 6.5-10.5 years). In the XRT and the no-XRT groups, 5-yr LRFS was 98% and 92% (p=0.21) and 10-yr LRFS was 98% and 41% (p < 0.001), respectively. The absence of radiation (HR = 23.63, 95% CI (3.09-180.48); p < 0.001) and R2 surgical resection margins (HR = 11.04, 95% CI (2.07-59.03); p < 0.001) incurred a 23-fold and 11-fold increased risk of local recurrence, respectively, while tumor size, depth, location, and neurovascular involvement were not found to be independent predictors of recurrence. The complication rate was 37% (38/102) in the XRT group and 10% (7/68) in the no-XRT group (p < 0.001). Eight patients (8/102, 8%) required surgical management for complication in the XRT group compared with two patients (2/68, 3%) in the no-XRT group (p=0.10). Higher radiation dose had a modest correlation with increased severity of complication (ρ=0.24; p=0.02). Conclusions: Adjuvant radiation after first-time resection of an ALT of the extremity was associated with a significantly reduced risk of local recurrence but a three-fold increase in complication rate. These data support a 10-year follow-up for these patients and inform a notable clinical trade-off if considering adjuvant radiation for this tumor with recurrent potential.

Telemedicine in Orthopedic Oncology During COVID-19: Patient Satisfaction, Reimbursement, and Physical Examination Competency.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced many institutions to implement telemedicine to facilitate continued patient care at a distance. The quality of patient care with telemedicine in orthopedic oncology has not been assessed. Between March and June 2020, a telephone survey of 64 patients was conducted in an academic orthopedic oncology practice. Patient satisfaction was assessed with a Likert scale metric, open-ended feedback, and direct comparisons between telemedicine and in-office visits. Billing and collection financial data of the telemedicine cohort and of a separate cohort of in-office visits during the same time period were compared. The clinical competency of telemedicine visits was measured by delayed or missed diagnoses and surgical site infections that may be attributable to lack of an in-person physical examination. Overall, patients were largely satisfied with their telemedicine experience. More than 90% of patients described telemedicine as equal to or better than in-office visits regarding convenience, time, privacy, and overall quality. Patients reported that better assessment of their physical condition may be indicated, particularly in early postoperative and early sarcoma surveillance visits. Two of 64 patients had adverse events (both local recurrences) potentially attributable to lack of an in-person physical examination. Institutional financial reimbursement of telemedicine visits was comparable to that of in-office visits. These findings have supported continued use of telemedicine in our practice, particularly for patients traveling significant distance and those returning for sarcoma surveillance. However, the limitations of lack of an in-person physical examination should be considered on a case-by-case basis. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(5):274-279.].