Missed opportunities in hospital quality measurement during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective investigation of US hospitals' CMS Star Ratings and 30-day mortality during the early pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: In the USA and UK, pandemic-era outcome data have been excluded from hospital rankings and pay-for-performance programmes. We assessed the relationship between US hospitals' pre-pandemic Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Overall Hospital Star ratings and early pandemic 30-day mortality among both patients with COVID and non-COVID to understand whether pre-existing structures, processes and outcomes related to quality enabled greater pandemic resiliency. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCE: A retrospective, claim-based data study using the 100% Inpatient Standard Analytic File and Medicare Beneficiary Summary File including all US Medicare Fee-for-Service inpatient encounters from 1 April 2020 to 30 November 2020 linked with the CMS Hospital Star Ratings using six-digit CMS provider IDs. OUTCOME MEASURE: The outcome was risk-adjusted 30-day mortality. We used multivariate logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, Elixhauser mortality index, US Census Region, month, hospital-specific January 2020 CMS Star rating (1-5 stars), COVID diagnosis (U07.1) and COVID diagnosis×CMS Star Rating interaction. RESULTS: We included 4 473 390 Medicare encounters from 2533 hospitals, with 92 896 (28.2%) mortalities among COVID-19 encounters and 387 029 (9.3%) mortalities among non-COVID encounters. There was significantly greater odds of mortality as CMS Star Ratings decreased, with 18% (95% CI 15% to 22%; p<0.0001), 33% (95% CI 30% to 37%; p<0.0001), 38% (95% CI 34% to 42%; p<0.0001) and 60% (95% CI 55% to 66%; p<0.0001), greater odds of COVID mortality comparing 4-star, 3-star, 2-star and 1-star hospitals (respectively) to 5-star hospitals. Among non-COVID encounters, there were 17% (95% CI 16% to 19%; p<0.0001), 24% (95% CI 23% to 26%; p<0.0001), 32% (95% CI 30% to 33%; p<0.0001) and 40% (95% CI 38% to 42%; p<0.0001) greater odds of mortality at 4-star, 3-star, 2-star and 1-star hospitals (respectively) as compared with 5-star hospitals. CONCLUSION: Our results support a need to further understand how quality outcomes were maintained during the pandemic. Valuable insights can be gained by including the reporting of risk-adjusted pandemic era hospital quality outcomes for high and low performing hospitals.

Hospital quality reporting in the pandemic era: to what extent did hospitals' COVID-19 census burdens impact 30-day mortality among non-COVID Medicare beneficiaries?

OBJECTIVES: Highly visible hospital quality reporting stakeholders in the USA such as the US News & World Report (USNWR) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) play an important health systems role via their transparent public reporting of hospital outcomes and performance. However, during the pandemic, many such quality measurement stakeholders and pay-for-performance programmes in the USA and Europe have eschewed the traditional risk adjustment paradigm, instead choosing to pre-emptively exclude months or years of pandemic era performance data due largely to hospitals' perceived COVID-19 burdens. These data exclusions may lead patients to draw misleading conclusions about where to seek care, while also masking genuine improvements or deteriorations in hospital quality that may have occurred during the pandemic. Here, we assessed to what extent hospitals' COVID-19 burdens (proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19) were associated with their non-COVID 30-day mortality rates from March through November 2020 to inform whether inclusion of pandemic-era data may still be appropriate. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study using the 100% CMS Inpatient Standard Analytic File and Master Beneficiary Summary File to include all US Medicare inpatient encounters with admission dates from 1 April 2020 through 30 November 2020, excluding COVID-19 encounters. Using linear regression, we modelled the association between hospitals' COVID-19 proportions and observed/expected (O/E) ratios, testing whether the relationship was non-linear. We calculated alternative hospital O/E ratios after selective pandemic data exclusions mirroring the USNWR data exclusion methodology. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We analysed 4 182 226 consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from across 2601 US hospitals. RESULTS: The association between hospital COVID-19 proportion and non-COVID O/E 30-day mortality was statistically significant (p<0.0001), but weakly correlated (r2=0.06). The median (IQR) pairwise relative difference in hospital O/E ratios comparing the alternative analysis with the original analysis was +3.7% (-2.5%, +6.7%), with 1908/2571 (74.2%) of hospitals having relative differences within ±10%. CONCLUSIONS: For non-COVID patient outcomes such as mortality, evidence-based inclusion of pandemic-era data is methodologically plausible and must be explored rather than exclusion of months or years of relevant patient outcomes data.

A Multisite Assessment of Inpatient Safety Event Rates During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

To date, there has been a notable lack of peer-reviewed or publicly available data documenting rates of hospital quality outcomes and patient safety events during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic era. The dearth of evidence is perhaps related to the US health care system triaging resources toward patient care and away from reporting and research and also reflects that data used in publicly reported hospital quality rankings and ratings typically lag 2-5 years. At our institution, a learning health system assessment is underway to evaluate how patient safety was affected by the pandemic. Here we share and discuss early findings, noting the limitations of self-reported safety event reporting, and suggest the need for further widespread investigations at other US hospitals. During the 2-year study period from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021 across 3 large US academic medical centers at our institution, we documented an overall rate of 25.8 safety events per 1000 inpatient days. The rate of events meeting "harm" criteria was 12.4 per 1000 inpatient days, the rate of nonharm events was 11.1 per 1000 inpatient days, and the fall rate was 2.3 per 1000 inpatient days. This descriptive exploratory analysis suggests that patient safety event rates at our institution did not increase over the course of the pandemic. However, increasing health care worker absences were nonlinearly and strongly associated with patient safety event rates, which raises questions regarding the mechanisms by which patient safety event rates may be affected by staff absences during pandemic peaks.

A Learning Health System Approach to Hospital Quality Performance Benchmarking: The Composite Hospital Quality Index.

US hospital quality rankings and ratings use disparate methodologies and are weakly correlated. This causes confusion for patients and hospital quality staff. At the authors' institution, a Composite Hospital Quality Index (CHQI) was developed to combine hospital quality ratings. This approach is described and a calculator is shared here for other health systems to explore their performance. Among the US News and World Report Top 50 Hospitals, hospital-specific numeric summary scores were aggregated from the 2021 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Overall Star Rating, the Spring 2021 Leapfrog Safety Grade, and the April 2021 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Star Rating. The CHQI is the hospital-specific sum of the national percentile-rankings across these 3 ratings. In this example, mean (SD) percentiles were as follows: CMS Stars 74 (19), Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems 63 (19), Leapfrog 65 (24), with mean (SD) CHQI of 202 (49). The CHQI is used at the authors' institution to identify improvement opportunities and ensure that high-quality care is delivered across the health system.

Association of Do-Not-Resuscitate Patient Case Mix With Publicly Reported Risk-Standardized Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates.

Importance: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services's (CMS's) 30-day risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) and risk-standardized readmission rate (RSRR) models do not adjust for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status of hospitalized patients and may bias Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) financial penalties and Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings. Objective: To identify the association between hospital-level DNR prevalence and condition-specific 30-day RSMR and RSRR and the implications of this association for HRRP financial penalty. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study obtained patient-level data from the Medicare Limited Data Set Inpatient Standard Analytical File and hospital-level data from the CMS Hospital Compare website for all consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018, in 4484 US hospitals. Hospitalized patients had a principal diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), stroke, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Incoming acute care transfers, discharges against medical advice, and patients coming from or discharged to hospice were among those excluded from the analysis. Exposures: Present-on-admission (POA) DNR status was defined as an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis code of V49.86 (before October 1, 2015) or as an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis code of Z66 (beginning October 1, 2015). Hospital-level prevalence of POA DNR status was calculated for each of the 5 conditions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital-level 30-day RSMRs and RSRRs for 5 condition-specific cohorts (mortality cohorts: AMI, HF, stroke, pneumonia, and COPD; readmission cohorts: AMI, HF, pneumonia, and COPD) and HRRP financial penalty status (yes or no). Results: Included in the study were 4 884 237 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day mortality cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.8 [8.5] years; 2 608 182 women [53.4%]) and 4 450 378 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day readmission cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.6 [8.5] years; 2 349 799 women [52.8%]). Hospital-level median (interquartile range [IQR]) prevalence of POA DNR status in the mortality cohorts varied: 11% (7%-16%) for AMI, 13% (7%-23%) for HF, 14% (9%-22%) for stroke, 17% (9%-26%) for pneumonia, and 10% (5%-18%) for COPD. For the readmission cohorts, the hospital-level median (IQR) POA DNR prevalence was 9% (6%-15%) for AMI, 12% (6%-22%) for HF, 16% (8%-24%) for pneumonia, and 9% (4%-17%) for COPD. The 30-day RSMRs were significantly higher for hospitals in the highest quintiles vs the lowest quintiles of DNR prevalence (eg, AMI: 12.9 [95% CI, 12.8-13.1] vs 12.5 [95% CI, 12.4-12.7]; P < .001). The inverse was true among the readmission cohorts, with the highest quintiles of DNR prevalence exhibiting the lowest RSRRs (eg, AMI: 15.3 [95% CI, 15.1-15.5] vs 15.9 [95% CI, 15.7-16.0]; P < .001). A 1% absolute increase in risk-adjusted hospital-level DNR prevalence was associated with greater odds of avoiding HRRP financial penalty (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.08; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that the lack of adjustment in CMS 30-day RSMR and RSRR models for POA DNR status of hospitalized patients may be associated with biased readmission penalization and hospital-level performance.

Prospective Implementation and Evaluation of a Decision-Tree Algorithm for Route of Hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of vaginal hysterectomy and outcomes after initiation of a prospective decision-tree algorithm to determine the optimal surgical route of hysterectomy. METHODS: A prospective algorithm to determine optimal route of hysterectomy was developed, which uses the following factors: history of laparotomy, uterine size, and vaginal access. The algorithm was implemented at our institution from November 24, 2015, to December 31, 2017, for patients requiring hysterectomy for benign indications. Expected route of hysterectomy was assigned by the algorithm and was compared with the actual route performed to identify compliance compared with deviation. Surgical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 365 patients who met inclusion criteria, 202 (55.3%) were expected to have a total vaginal hysterectomy, 57 (15.6%) were expected to have an examination under anesthesia followed by total vaginal hysterectomy, 52 (14.2%) were expected to have an examination under anesthesia followed by robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, and 54 (14.8%) were expected to have an abdominal or robotic-laparoscopic route of hysterectomy. Forty-six procedures (12.6%) deviated from the algorithm to a more invasive route (44 robotic, two abdominal). Seven patients had total vaginal hysterectomy when robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy or abdominal hysterectomy was expected by the algorithm. Overall, 71% of patients were expected to have a vaginal route of hysterectomy per the algorithm, of whom 81.5% had a total vaginal hysterectomy performed; more than 99% of the total vaginal hysterectomies attempted were successfully completed. CONCLUSION: Vaginal surgery is feasible, carries a low complication rate with excellent outcomes, and should have a place in gynecologic surgery. National use of this prospective algorithm may increase the rate of total vaginal hysterectomy and decrease health care costs.

Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes after lymph node assessment via a sentinel lymph node algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with serous and clear cell endometrial carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To compare survival after nodal assessment using a sentinel lymph node (SLN) algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy (LND) in serous or clear cell endometrial carcinoma, and to compare survival in node-negative cases. METHODS: Three-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival were compared between one institution that used comprehensive LND to the renal veins and a second institution that used an SLN algorithm with ultra-staging with inverse-probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) derived from propensity scores to adjust for covariate imbalance between cohorts. RESULTS: 214 patients were identified (118 SLN cohort, 96 LND cohort). Adjuvant therapy differed between the cohorts; 84% and 40% in the SLN and LND cohorts, respectively, received chemotherapy ± radiation therapy. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year RFS rates were 69% and 80%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year OS rates were 88% and 77%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the association of surgical approach (SLN vs LND) with progression and death was 1.46 (95% CI: 0.70-3.04) and 0.44 (95% CI: 0.19-1.02), respectively. In the 168 node-negative cases, the IPTW-adjusted 3-year RFS rates were 73% and 91%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year OS rates were 88% and 86%, respectively. In this subgroup, IPTW-adjusted HR for the association of surgical approach (SLN vs LND) with progression and death was 3.12 (95% CI: 1.02-9.57) and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.24-1.95), respectively. CONCLUSION: OS was not compromised with the SLN algorithm. SLN may be associated with a decreased RFS but similar OS in node-negative cases despite the majority receiving chemotherapy. This may be due to differences in surveillance.

Enhanced Recovery after Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Procedures with Bowel Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based approach to perioperative care of the surgical patient. A mounting body of literature in gynecologic surgery has demonstrated that ERAS improves postoperative outcomes, shortens hospital length of stay, and reduces cost without increasing complications or readmissions. Most of the existing literature has concentrated on open surgery, questioning if patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery also derive benefit. Our aim was to systematically review the literature on ERAS after minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) with and without bowel surgery. Given the paucity of studies on ERAS in MIGS with bowel surgery (1 study), we expanded our search to include studies of ERAS in patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal resections alone. Twelve studies were identified through an electronic database search of PubMed, Medline, and Ovid EMBASE. These studies included patients undergoing MIGS for benign and/or malignant indications and showed that ERAS pathways decreased length of stay and/or increased the proportion of same-day discharge surgeries, improved patient satisfaction, and reduced hospital costs while maintaining low postoperative complication and readmission rates. Although limited, data from a single study suggest that ERAS in MIGS with bowel surgery leads to shortened hospital stay, stable postoperative morbidity, and less readmissions. Although the variation between the published protocols underscores the need for standardization, existing literature supports the adoption of ERAS as safe and effective when planning MIGS.

Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes between two nodal assessment methods in patients with deeply invasive endometrioid endometrial carcinoma: A sentinel lymph node algorithm versus a comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare oncologic outcomes in the staging of deeply invasive endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC) using a sentinel lymph node algorithm (SLN) versus pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy to the renal veins (LND); to compare outcomes in node-negative cases. METHODS: At two institutions, patients with deeply invasive (≥50% myometrial invasion) EEC were identified. One institution used LND (2004-2008), the other SLN (2005-2013). FIGO stage IV cases were excluded. Clinical characteristics and follow-up data were recorded. RESULTS: 176 patients were identified (LND, 94; SLN, 82). SLN patients were younger (p = 0.003) and had more LVSI (p < 0.001). 9.8% in the SLN and 29.8% in the LND cohorts, respectively, received no adjuvant therapy (p < 0.001). There was no association between type of assessment and recurrence; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR; LND vs. SLN) 0.87 (95%CI 0.40, 1.89) PFS. After controlling for age and adjuvant therapy, there was no association between assessment method and OS (aHR 2.54; 95%CI 0.81, 7.91). The node-negative cohort demonstrated no association between survival and assessment method: aHR 0.69 (95%CI 0.23, 2.03) PFS, 0.81 (95%CI 0.16, 4.22) OS. In the node-negative cohort, neither adjuvant EBRT+/-IVRT (HR 1.63; 95%CI 0.18, 14.97) nor adjuvant chemotherapy+/-EBRT+/-IVRT (HR 0.49; 95%CI 0.11, 2.22) were associated with OS, compared to no adjuvant therapy or IVRT-only. CONCLUSION: Use of an SLN algorithm in deeply invasive EEC does not impair oncologic outcomes. Survival is excellent in node-negative cases, irrespective of assessment method. Adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative patients does not appear to impact outcome.

Society of Gynecologic Oncology Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force report: The Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model (ECAP).

Health care in the United States is in the midst of a significant transformation from a "fee for service" to a "fee for value" based model. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 has only accelerated this transition. Anticipating these reforms, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology developed the Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force (PPRTF) in 2015 to develop strategies to ensure fair value based reimbursement policies for gynecologic cancer care. The PPRTF elected as a first task to develop an Alternative Payment Model for thesurgical management of low risk endometrial cancer. The history, rationale, and conceptual framework for the development of an Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model are described in this white paper, as well as directions forfuture efforts.

Society of Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Outcomes Registry: From small beginnings come great things.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical registries within medical societies have demonstrated the capacity to promote quality improvement. Opportunities for well-designed data repositories could yield reliable national standards for informing reimbursement, determining adherence to care guidelines, maintaining board certification, and developing bundled payment models. Looking to the future, we set out to develop a gynecologic cancer registry serving the members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO). METHODS: The SGO Clinical Outcomes Registry (COR) initiated a web-based data entry platform as a foray into developing a functional registry, compiling data elements specific to gynecologic oncology. Endometrial and ovarian cancer patients began enrollment in early 2014. Within one year, 19 sites were participating with the addition of cervical cancer patients in January 2015. RESULTS: To date, >6500 patients are currently entered from 29 sites, and the COR is being queried to address topics of quality improvement, disparities, and cancer outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The SGO COR has proven the feasibility of developing a functional gynecologic cancer registry, with high uptake, rapid accrual, and ability to investigate topics of quality and outcome using the COR.

Impact of surgical approach and patient factors on Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey scoring in gynecologic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey responses of women who underwent gynecologic surgery at our institution across patient factors and surgical approach. METHODS: We identified patients with returned HCAHPS surveys following an inpatient laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy in gynecologic surgery from 10/1/2012-9/30/2015. Exclusions included patient age<18years, discharge by a service other than Gynecologic Surgery, or refusal of Minnesota research authorization. HCAHPS composite measures were calculated using published top-box and summary star rating methodologies and dichotomized as "high" versus "low." Chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and multivariable logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Of 403 women who met inclusion criteria, 109 (27%) underwent laparoscopic surgery (19% laparoscopic hysterectomy and 8% other laparoscopic procedures) and 294 (73%) laparotomy (28% open hysterectomy and 47% other open procedures). Length of stay (LOS) was longer for laparotomy cases vs. laparoscopy cases (median 2.5days following open hysterectomy and 4days following other open procedures vs 1day following laparoscopic hysterectomy and other laparoscopic procedures, p<0.001). Patients who underwent laparotomy other than hysterectomy were more likely to have low summary scores (79% vs 66% laparoscopic hysterectomy, 66% open hysterectomy, and 52% other laparoscopic procedures, p=0.005). After adjustment, non-hysterectomy laparotomy cases were more likely to have a low summary score than non-hysterectomy laparoscopy (OR 3.86, 95% CI 1.71-8.68, p=0.001). This significance did not remain after further adjusting for LOS. CONCLUSION: In Gynecologic Surgery, patients undergoing laparotomy gave lower hospital ratings compared to laparoscopy. Those with longer LOS reported poorer patient experience, which is the driving variable for lower scores. In the future, it may be necessary to adjust for surgical approach when reporting patient experience scoring.

Developing a Clinico-Molecular Test for Individualized Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: The interplay of Precision Medicine Informatics with Clinical and Health Economics Dimensions.

We report recent progress in the development of a precision test for individualized use of the VEGF-A targeting drug bevacizumab for treating ovarian cancer. We discuss the discovery model stage (i.e., past feasibility modeling and before conversion to the production test). Main results: (a) Informatics modeling plays a critical role in supporting driving clinical and health economic requirements. (b) The novel computational models support the creation of a precision test with sufficient predictivity to reduce healthcare system costs up to $30 billion over 10 years, and make the use of bevacizumab affordable without loss of length or quality of life.

Geographic disparities in the distribution of the U.S. gynecologic oncology workforce: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology study.

A recent ASCO workforce study projects a significant shortage of oncologists in the U.S. by 2020, especially in rural/underserved (R/US) areas. The current study aim was to determine the patterns of distribution of U.S. gynecologic oncologists (GO) and to identify provider-based attitudes and barriers that may prevent GOs from practicing in R/US regions. U.S. GOs (n = 743) were electronically solicited to participate in an on-line survey regarding geographic distribution and participation in outreach care. A total of 320 GOs (43%) responded; median age range was 35-45 years and 57% were male. Most practiced in an urban setting (72%) at a university hospital (43%). Only 13% of GOs practiced in an area with a population < 50,000. A desire to remain in academics and exposure to senior-level mentorship were the factors most influencing initial practice location. Approximately 50% believed geographic disparities exist in GO workforce distribution that pose access barriers to care; however, 39% "strongly agreed" that cancer patients who live in R/US regions should travel to urban cancer centers to receive care within a center of excellence model. GOs who practice within 50 miles of only 0-5 other GOs were more likely to provide R/US care compared to those practicing within 50 miles of ≥ 10 GOs (p < 0.0001). Most (39%) believed the major barriers to providing cancer care in R/US areas were volume and systems-based. Most also believed the best solution was a hybrid approach, with coordination of local and centralized cancer care services. Among GOs, a self-reported rural-urban disparity exists in the density of gynecologic oncologists. These study findings may help address barriers to providing cancer care in R/US practice environments.

Determining Optimal Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Indications: Clinical Decision Tree Algorithm.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate practice change after initiation of a robotic surgery program using a clinical algorithm to determine the optimal surgical approach to benign hysterectomy. METHODS: A retrospective postrobot cohort of benign hysterectomies (2009-2013) was identified and the expected surgical route was determined from an algorithm using vaginal access and uterine size as decision tree branches. We excluded the laparoscopic hysterectomy route. A prerobot cohort (2004-2005) was used to evaluate a practice change after the addition of robotic technology (2007). Costs were estimated. RESULTS: Cohorts were similar in regard to uterine size, vaginal parity, and prior laparotomy history. In the prerobot cohort (n=473), 320 hysterectomies (67.7%) were performed vaginally and 153 (32.3%) through laparotomy with 15.1% (46/305) performed abdominally when the algorithm specified vaginal hysterectomy. In the postrobot cohort (n=1,198), 672 hysterectomies (56.1%) were vaginal; 390 (32.6%) robot-assisted; and 136 (11.4%) abdominal. Of 743 procedures, 38 (5.1%) involved laparotomy and 154 (20.7%) involved robotic technique when a vaginal approach was expected. Robotic hysterectomies had longer operations (141 compared with 59 minutes, P<.001) and higher rates of surgical site infection (4.7% compared with 0.2%, P<.001) and urinary tract infection (8.1% compared with 4.1%, P=.05) but no difference in major complications (P=.27) or readmissions (P=.27) compared with vaginal hysterectomy. Algorithm conformance would have saved an estimated $800,000 in hospital costs over 5 years. CONCLUSION: When a decision tree algorithm indicated vaginal hysterectomy as the route of choice, vaginal hysterectomy was associated with shorter operative times, lower infection rate, and lower cost. Vaginal hysterectomy should be the route of choice when feasible.

Abdominal Incision Injection of Liposomal Bupivacaine and Opioid Use After Laparotomy for Gynecologic Malignancies.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate opioid use and pain scores associated with incisional injection of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride after laparotomy for gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare abdominal incision infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine with bupivacaine hydrochloride after modification of a pre-existing enhanced recovery pathway. Patients undergoing staging laparotomy or complex cytoreductive surgery under the updated pathway were compared with patients treated under the original pathway (historic controls). Endpoints included cumulative opioid use (primary outcome) in oral morphine equivalents and cumulative pain score. RESULTS: In the complex cytoreductive cohort, median oral morphine equivalents were lower in the liposomal bupivacaine group through 24 hours (30 compared with 53.5 mg, P=.002), 48 hours (37.5 compared with 82.5 mg, P=.005), and the length of stay (62 compared with 100.5 mg, P=.006). Fewer liposomal bupivacaine patients required intravenous rescue opioids (28.9% compared with 55.6%, P<.001) or patient-controlled analgesia (4.1% compared with 33.3%, P<.001). Cumulative pain score was no different between groups through 48 hours (161 compared with 158, P=.69). Postoperative nausea and ileus were less frequent in patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine. Median hospital stay was 5 days in both groups. In the staging laparotomy cohort, cumulative opioids and cumulative pain score were no different between groups (through 48 hours: 162 compared with 161, P=.62; 38 compared with 38, P=.68, respectively). Intravenous rescue opioids (15.3% compared with 28.6%, P=.05) and patient-controlled analgesia (1.4% compared with 8.3%, P=.05) were used less frequently in the liposomal bupivacaine group. Median hospital stay was 4 days in both groups. Despite the higher cost of liposomal bupivacaine, total pharmacy costs did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Abdominal incision infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine was associated with less opioid and patient-controlled analgesia use with no change in pain scores compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride after complex cytoreductive surgery for gynecologic malignancies. Improvements were also seen in patients undergoing staging laparotomy.

Disparities in Surgical Care Among Women With Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze contemporary U.S. use of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer and associated inpatient complications and costs. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the National Inpatient Sample database was analyzed in patients with nonmetastatic endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy during 2012-2013. Hierarchical multiple logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to compare complications among patients treated with open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy surgery. Cost of care was also compared using generalized linear modeling. RESULTS: We identified 9,799 patients; 52.4% underwent open and 47.6% minimally invasive hysterectomy. Many patients (43.4%) were treated at low-volume hospitals (less than 10 endometrial cancer cases annually). Patients were less likely to undergo open surgery in high-volume compared with low-volume hospitals (51.8% compared with 58.1%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.94) and more likely to undergo open surgery in rural compared with urban teaching hospitals (75.6% compared with 51.1%, respectively; adjusted OR 14.34, 95% CI 9.66-21.27), government compared with nonprofit hospitals (61.3% compared with 51.1%, respectively; adjusted OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.15-2.39), and in patients of black (67.9%; OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.30-1.65) and "other" race (60.5%; adjusted OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.99-2.87) compared with white race (49.2%, referent). Open surgery was associated with increased perioperative complications (adjusted OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.48-3.17) and a $1,243 increase in cost per case compared with minimally invasive approaches (P<.001). Using minimally invasive surgery for 80% of study patients may have averted 2,733 complications and saved approximately $19 million. CONCLUSION: Most U.S. women with endometrial cancer continue to be treated with open hysterectomy surgery despite increased complication rates and financial costs associated with this approach. A disparity in endometrial cancer surgical care exists that is affected by patient race and hospital geography and cancer volumes.

Incorporating robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer staging: Analysis of morbidity and costs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how the introduction of robotic-assisted surgery affects treatment-related morbidity and cost of endometrial cancer (EC) staging. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients with stage I-III EC undergoing surgical staging between 2007 and 2012 at our institution. Costs (from surgery to 30days after surgery) were set based on the Medicare cost-to-charge ratio for each year and inflated to 2014 values. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to decrease the allocation bias when comparing outcomes between surgical groups. RESULTS: We focused our analysis on the 251 EC patients who had robotic-assisted surgery and the 384 who had open staging. During the study period, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased and open staging decreased (P<0.001). Correcting group imbalances by using IPW methodology, we observed that patients undergoing robotic-assisted staging had a significantly lower postoperative complication rate, lower blood transfusion rate, longer median operating time, shorter median length of stay, and lower readmission rate than patients undergoing open staging (all P<0.001). Overall 30-day costs were similar between the 2 groups, with robotic-assisted surgery having significantly higher median operating room costs ($2820 difference; P<0.001) but lower median room and board costs ($2929 difference; P<0.001) than open surgery. Increasing experience with robotic-assisted staging was significantly associated with a decrease in median operating time (P=0.002) and length of stay (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of robotic-assisted surgery for EC staging improves patient outcomes. It provides women the benefits of minimally invasive surgery without increasing costs and potentially improves patient turnover.

Utilization of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Endometrial Cancer Care: A Quality and Cost Disparity.

OBJECTIVE: To describe case mix-adjusted hospital level utilization of minimally invasive surgery for hysterectomy in the treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the proportion of patients who had a minimally invasive compared with open hysterectomy for nonmetastatic endometrial cancer using the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, 2007-2011. Hospitals were stratified by endometrial cancer case volumes (low=less than 10; medium=11-30; high=greater than 30 cases). Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to evaluate hospital and patient variables associated with minimally invasive utilization, complications, and costs. RESULTS: Overall, 32,560 patients were identified; 33.6% underwent a minimally invasive hysterectomy with an increase of 22.0-50.8% from 2007 to 2011. Low-volume cancer centers demonstrated the lowest minimally invasive utilization rate (23.6%; P<.001). After multivariable adjustment, minimally invasive surgery was less likely to be performed in patients with Medicaid compared with private insurance (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.72), black and Hispanic compared with white patients (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.41-0.46 for black and 0.77, 95% CI 0.72-0.82 for white patients), and more likely to be performed in high- compared with low-volume hospitals (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 2.15-8.27). Open hysterectomy was associated with a higher risk of surgical site infection (adjusted OR 6.21, 95% CI 5.11-7.54) and venous thromboembolism (adjusted OR 3.65, 95% CI 3.12-4.27). Surgical cases with complications had higher mean hospitalization costs for all hysterectomy procedure types (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Hospital utilization of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer varies considerably in the United States, representing a disparity in the quality and cost of surgical care delivered nationwide.