Billing rules / global period affect postoperative follow-up practices following total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common procedure following which postoperative visits are important to optimize outcomes. The associated global billing period includes the 90 postoperative days (or approximately 13 weeks), during which professional billing is included with the surgery itself. The current study assessed clinical practice patterns relative to the global billing period. METHODS: Using the PearlDiver M91Ortho dataset, the incidence and timing of Evaluation and Management (E&M) codes in the 26 weeks following THA were assessed. The follow-up visits within and beyond the global billing period, and those conducted by surgeons versus non-surgeon advanced practice providers (APPs) were determined. RESULTS: 77,843 THAs were identified. Follow-up visits peaked at postoperative weeks 3, 7, and 14. The greatest week-to-week variation in the number of follow-ups was from weeks 13 to 14 immediately following the global billing period (representing a greater than 4-fold increase in visits.) During the first 13 postop weeks, 73.8% of patients were seen by orthopedic surgeons (as opposed to APPs). In the following 13 weeks, a significantly greater percentage of visits were with surgeons (86.8%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Following the THA global billing period, there was marked increase in the number of follow-ups and transition to a greater percentage being performed by the surgeons. These results provide interesting insight into the potential impact of the billing structure on how practice is pursued.

Changes in the Utilization of Cervicothoracic Injections Between 2010 and 2020.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiologic study. OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends and patient characteristics of those undergoing cervicothoracic transforaminal, interlaminar, and facet injections over time. BACKGROUND: Cervicothoracic transforaminal, interlaminar, and facet injections are considered for varied spinal pathologies. Evolving literature, changing physician preferences, insurance reimbursement policies, and patient factors may influence the utilization of such injections over time. METHODS: Patients undergoing cervicothoracic transforaminal, interlaminar, and facet injections 2010-2020 were identified in the M151Ortho PearlDiver database using Current Procedural Terminology coding. Patient age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, insurance plan (commercial, Medicaid, Medicare), and region of the country where the procedure was performed (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West) were extracted and assessed over study intervals based on prevalence per 100,000 covered lives. RESULTS: Cervicothoracic transforaminal, interlaminar, and facet injections were identified for 195,221 (11.3%), 951,191 (55.2%), and 575,228 (33.4%) patients, respectively. Patient characteristics for each injection type were defined. The annual number of injections performed per 100,000 covered lives decreased during the study period for transforaminal (17.1% decrease) and interlaminar (9.3% decrease) but increased for facet (3.7% increase) injections (P<0.0001 for each). Stratifying by patient insurance type, administration of transforaminal, interlaminar, and facet injections per 100,000 covered lives was proportionally greatest for commercially insured patients (55%, 50%, and 45%, respectively), and proportionally smallest for Medicaid patients (10%, 13%, and 13%, respectively). Anesthesiology physicians performed the most injections, followed by physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians, with both provider types most frequently performing interlaminar injections, followed by facet and transforaminal injections. CONCLUSION: Annual cervicothoracic transforaminal and interlaminar injection utilization declined by 17.1% and 9.3% from 2010 to 2020, whereas facet injection administration increased by 3.7% over the same interval. Evolving practice patterns are important to consider in characterizing the overall landscape of spine care.

The Burden of Revision Total Ankle Replacement Has Increased From 2010 to 2020.

Background: Total ankle replacement (TAR) surgery has increased in recent decades. The aim of this study was to investigate the evolving burden of revision surgery and risk factors and timing of revision or explant. Methods: Using the 2010 to 2020 PearlDiver M151Ortho data set, this retrospective cohort study identified primary TAR, TAR revision, and TAR explant patients via Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Disease Procedural (ICD-P) codes. This database contains billing claims information across all payers and sites of care in the United States. Patient factors investigated included age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI). Annual incidence for primary TAR was normalized per 100 000 covered lives in the data set for each year of study and recorded. Annual incidence of revision TAR and explant were normalized per 100 TARs performed for each year of study. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine independent risk factors for revision TAR or explant. For explants, the eventual intervention by 2 years was analyzed. Ten-year timing and survival to revision or explant surgery following unilateral TAR were characterized. Results: A total of 10 531 primary, 1218 revision, and 1735 explant TARs were identified. After normalization, TAR utilization increased by 284% from 2010 to 2020, annual TAR revisions rose 28%, and annual TAR explants decreased 65%. Independent predictors of revision TAR were younger age (odds ratio [OR] 1.29 per decade decrease) and higher ECI (OR 1.23 per 2-point increase). Independent predictors of explant included younger age (OR 1.80 per decade decrease), female sex (OR 1.17), and higher ECI (OR 1.35 per 2-point increase). The 10-year implant survival rate was 91.8%, of which 73% of revisions and 83% of explants occurred in the first 3 years following index TAR. Conclusion: TAR utilization has grown substantially over the past decade, with minimal increases in the annual rate of revision surgery with respect to index procedures performed. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Adverse Events After Ankle Fracture Open Reduction Internal Fixation Among Patients With and Without Documented Cannabis and Tobacco Use.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fractures are common orthopaedic injuries that may be indicated for open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). Although the negative impact of tobacco use on perioperative outcomes of ankle fracture ORIF has been described, the potential impact of cannabis use on related outcomes is not as well established. METHODS: Retrospective database study of adult patients undergoing ankle ORIF for closed, isolated, ankle fractures from the 2010-2021 Q1 PearlDiver M151 data set. Subcohorts without and with cannabis and/or tobacco use were identified based on coding and matched based on patient age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) scores to yield groups of nonusers, tobacco users, tobacco and cannabis users, and cannabis users. Ninety-day adverse events were assessed between matched subcohorts with multivariable logistic regression controlling for age, sex, and ECI. RESULTS: A total of 149 289 patients met study inclusion criteria for whom tobacco only use was documented for 14 989 (10.0%), tobacco and cannabis use for 2726 (1.8%), and cannabis only use for 867 (0.6%). Matching yielded 823 for each group. On multivariable analyses, isolated tobacco users were at higher odds of 90-day urinary tract infections (UTIs) (odds ratio [OR] 2.64), minor adverse events (OR 2.33), all-cause adverse events (OR 2.17), readmissions (OR 1.85), and severe adverse events (OR 1.84). Tobacco and cannabis comorbid users were at a marginally higher odds of 90-day UTI (OR 2.82), minor adverse events (OR 2.51), readmissions (OR 2.39), and any adverse events (OR 2.22). Cannabis only users were not at greater odds of 90-day adverse events relative to nonusers. CONCLUSION: Patients with tobacco use (alone or with cannabis) were at greater odds of 90-day adverse events following ankle fracture ORIF, but cannabis only users were not. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective database study.

Risk of Contralateral Hip Fracture Following Initial Hip Fracture Among Geriatric Fragility Fracture Patients.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric hip fractures are common and associated with high morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, timing, and risk factors of contralateral hip fracture after initial hip fracture. METHODS: Initial hip fractures in patients older than 65 years were abstracted from the national, administrative M91Ortho PearlDiver data set. Incidence and timing of contralateral hip fractures in the following 10 years were identified. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis until contralateral hip fracture was conducted. To account for patient mortality over the later years, 2-year univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine factors predictive of contralateral hip fracture. RESULTS: Of the initial 104,311 hip fractures identified, contralateral hip fracture in the 10 years that followed was identified for 7,186 (6.9%), of which 68.4% occurred in the first 2 years. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis until contralateral fracture revealed the 10-year incidence to be 12.9% when controlling for those lost from the data set during the study period. Multivariate logistic regression revealed independent predictors of contralateral hip fracture in the 2 years after index hip fracture, when the incidence was greatest, to be female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.15), body mass index < 20 (OR 1.30), and percutaneous pinning surgery for initial hip fracture fixation (OR 1.58) (P < 0.0001 for each). CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of 104,311 geriatric hip fractures, Kaplan-Meier analysis for contralateral hip fracture found the 10-year incidence to be 12.9%, of which nearly 70% were in the first 2 years, and predisposing factors were defined. As such, future research should aim to identify the cause and mitigate the risk of secondary contralateral hip fractures in geriatric patients.