The continued financial effect of COVID: Increasing costs for non-elective major lower extremity amputations.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated changes in processes of care, which significantly impacted surgical care. This study evaluated the impact of these changes on patient outcomes and costs for non-elective major lower extremity amputations (LEA). Methods: The 2019-2021 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration database was queried for adult patients who underwent non-elective major LEA. Per-patient inflation-adjusted costs were collected. Patient cohorts were established based on Florida COVID-19 mortality rates: COVID-heavy (CH) included nine months with the highest mortality, COVID-light (CL) included nine months with the lowest mortality, and pre-COVID (PC) included nine months before COVID (2019). Outcomes included in-hospital patient outcomes and hospitalization cost. Results: 6132 patients were included (1957 PC, 2104 CH, and 2071 CL). Compared to PC, there was increased patient acuity at presentation, but morbidity (31%), mortality (4%), and length of stay (median 12 [8-17] days) were unchanged during CH and CL. Additionally, costs significantly increased during the pandemic; median total cost rose 9%, room costs increased by 16%, ICU costs rose by 15%, and operating room costs rose by 15%. When COVID-positive patients were excluded, cost of care was still significantly higher during CH and CL. Conclusions: Despite maintaining pre-pandemic standards, as evidenced by unchanged outcomes, the pandemic led to increased costs for patients undergoing non-elective major LEA. This was likely due to increased patient acuity, resource strain, and supply chain shortages during the pandemic. Key message: While patient outcomes for non-elective major lower extremity amputations remained consistent during the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare costs significantly increased, likely due to increased patient acuity and heightened pressures on resources and supply chains. These findings underscore the need for informed policy changes to mitigate the financial impact on patients and healthcare systems for future public health emergencies.

The downtrending cost of robotic bariatric surgery: a cost analysis of 47,788 bariatric patients.

The surgical robot is assumed to be a fixed, indirect cost. We hypothesized rising volume of robotic bariatric procedures would decrease cost per patient over time. Patients who underwent elective, initial gastric bypass (GB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for morbid obesity were selected from Florida Agency for Health Care Administration database from 2017 to 2021. Inflation-adjusted cost per patient was collected. Cost-over-time ($/patient year) and change in cost-over-time were calculated for open, laparoscopic, and robotic cases. Linear regression on cost generated predictive parameters. Density plots utilizing area under the curve demonstrated cost overlap. Among 76 hospitals, 11,472 bypasses (223 open, 6885 laparoscopic, 4364 robotic) and 36,316 sleeves (26,596 laparoscopic, 9724 robotic) were included. Total cost for robotic was approximately 1.5-fold higher (p < 0.001) than laparoscopic for both procedures. For GB, laparoscopic had lower total ($15,520) and operative ($6497) average cost compared to open (total $17,779; operative $9273) and robotic (total $21,756; operative $10,896). For SG, laparoscopic total cost was significantly less than robotic ($10,691 vs. $16,393). Robotic GB cost-over-time increased until 2021, when there was a large decrease in cost (-$944, compared with 2020). Robotic SG total cost-over time fluctuated, but decreased significantly in 2021 (-$490 compared with 2020). While surgical costs rose significantly in 2020 for bariatric procedures, our study suggests a possible downward trend in robotic bariatric surgery as total and operative costs are decreasing at a higher rate than laparoscopic costs.

Patient outcomes and cost in robotic emergency general surgery.

The use of robotic technology in general surgery continues to increase, though its utility for emergency general surgery remains under-studied. This study explores the current trends in patient outcomes and cost of robotic emergency general surgery (REGS). The Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration database (2018-2020) was queried for adult patients undergoing intra-abdominal emergency general surgery within 24 h of admission and linked to CMS Cost Reports/Hospital Compare, American Hospital Association, and Rand Corporation Hospital datasets. Patients from the four most common REGS procedures were propensity matched to laparoscopic equivalents for hospital cost analysis. A telephone survey was performed with the top 10 REGS hospitals to identify key qualities for successful REGS programs. 181 hospitals (119 REGS, 62 non-REGS) performed 60,733 emergency surgeries. Six-percent were REGS. The most common REGS were cholecystectomy, appendectomy, inguinal and ventral hernia repairs. Before and after propensity matching, total cost for these four procedures were significantly higher than their laparoscopic equivalents, which was due to higher surgical cost as the non-operative costs did not differ. There were no differences in mortality, individual complications, or length of stay for most of the four procedures. REGS volume significantly increased each year. The survey found that 8/10 hospitals have robotic-trained staff available 24/7. Although REGS volume is increasing in Florida, cost remains significantly higher than laparoscopy. Given higher costs and lack of significantly improved outcomes, further study should be undertaken to better inform which specific patient populations would benefit from REGS.

Interpretable machine learning accurately reclassifies lobectomy surgical approaches by cost.

BACKGROUND: The volume of robotic lung resection continues to increase despite its higher costs and unproven superiority to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. We evaluated whether machine learning can accurately identify factors influencing cost and reclassify high-cost operative approaches into lower-cost alternatives. METHODS: The Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital and Physician Compare datasets were queried for patients undergoing open, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and robotic lobectomy. K-means cluster analysis was used to identify robotic clusters based on total cost. Predictive models were built using artificial neural networks, Support Vector Machines, Classification and Regression Trees, and Gradient Boosted Machines algorithms. Models were applied to the high-volume robotic group to determine patients whose cost cluster changed if undergoing a video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approach. A local interpretable model-agnostic explanation approach personalized cost per patient. RESULTS: Of the 6,618 cases included in the analysis, we identified 4 cost clusters. Application of artificial neural networks to the robotic subgroup identified 1,642 (65%) cases with no re-assignment of cost cluster, 583 (23%) with reduced costs, and 300 (12%) with increased costs if they had undergone video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approach. The 5 overall highest cost predictors were patient admission from the clinic, diagnosis of metastatic cancer, presence of cancer, urgent hospital admission, and dementia. CONCLUSION: K-means cluster analysis and machine learning identify a patient population that may undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery or robotic lobectomy without a significant difference in total cost. Local interpretable model-agnostic explanation identifies individual patient factors contributing to cost. Application of this modeling may reliably stratify high-cost patients into lower-cost approaches and provide a rationale for reducing expenditure.

Association of state-level factors with rate of firearm-related deaths.

Background: Over 48,000 people died by firearm in the United States in 2021. Firearm violence has many inciting factors, but the full breadth of associations has not been characterized. We explored several state-level factors including factors not previously studied or insufficiently studied, to determine their association with state firearm-related death rates. Methods: Several state-level factors, including firearm open carry (OC) and concealed carry (CC) laws, state rank, partisan lean, urbanization, poverty rate, anger index, and proportion of college-educated adults, were assessed for association with total firearm-related death rates (TFDR). Secondary outcomes were firearm homicide (FHR) and firearm suicide rates (FSR). Exploratory data analysis with correlation plots and ANOVA was performed. Univariable and multivariable linear regression on the rate of firearm-related deaths was also performed. Results: All 50 states were included. TFDR and FSR were higher in permitless OC and permitless CC states. FHR did not differ based on OC or CC category. Open carry and CC were eliminated in all three regression models due to a lack of significance. Significant factors for each model were: 1) TFDR - partisan lean, urbanization, poverty rate, and state ranking; 2) FHR - poverty rate; 3) FSR - partisan lean and urbanization. Conclusions: Neither open nor concealed carry is associated with firearm-related death rates when socioeconomic factors are concurrently considered. Factors associated with firearm homicide and suicide differ and will likely require separate interventions to reduce firearm-related deaths. Key message: Neither open carry nor concealed carry law are associated with total firearm-related death rate, but poverty rate, urbanization, partisan lean, and state ranking are associated. When analyzing firearm homicide and suicide rates separately, poverty rate is strongly associated with firearm homicide rate, while urbanization and partisan lean are associated with firearm suicide rate.

Causal analysis of socioeconomic influence on cost of care: The emergency general surgery model.

BACKGROUND: This study characterizes the relationship between SES and cost of emergency general surgery (EGS). METHODS: Utilizing Florida AHCA (2016-2020), patients undergoing the 7 most common EGS were identified. Distressed Community Index (DCI) was linked, which quantifies SES through unemployment, poverty, and other factors. Zipcodes are assigned DCI 0 (no distress) to 100 (severe distress). Linear regression with stepwise elimination was conducted. Top and bottom DCI quintiles were propensity matched for demographics, comorbidities, and procedure. RESULTS: 144,924 admissions were included. Linear regression eliminated 5 of 28 variables, including DCI. Top cost contributors were discharge-43%; comorbidities-14%; age-9%. Distressed patients received less home health and inpatient rehab. Distressed patients utilized 4-/5-star hospitals less and had higher odds of mortality. CONCLUSION: Discharge, mortality, and hospital characteristics differ significantly between DCI communities. Total cost was similar, and is strongly influenced by discharge status, while DCI had no effect.

Analysis of temporal trends in robotic surgery costs using the outpatient inguinal hernia repair model.

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology is increasingly utilized despite increased costs compared with laparoscopic procedures. As the robot is a fixed, indirect cost, we hypothesized increased volume of robotic procedures will decrease operative costs per patient. The model of same-day, unilateral, primary inguinal hernia surgery in males was chosen. METHODS: The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration database was queried for inguinal hernia repairs from 2015 to 2020. Inflation adjusted total and operative costs per patient were collected. Cost-over-time and change in cost-over-time were calculated for open, laparoscopic, and robotic cases. Linear regression using cost as the dependent variable generated predictive parameters. RESULTS: In the study, 36,393 cases (19,364 open, 12,322 laparoscopic, 4,707 robotic) among 86 hospitals were included. In addition, 18 hospitals were "high volume," defined as total robotic inguinal hernia volume of >100 (range, 107-368) during the study period, and included 8,604 cases (3,915 open, 1,786 laparoscopic, 2,903 robotic). Compared with laparoscopic, total robotic cost and cost over time were 1.22- (P < .001) and 1.5-fold higher (P < .002). The change in cost-over-time was increased significantly in robotic cases: 358, 420, 548, 691, and 1,542 cost-over-time for 2015 to 2020, respectively. Positive contributors to total hospital robotic costs were total robotic inguinal hernia volume (17.3), total laparoscopic inguinal hernia volume (12.6), and number of hospital beds (1.9). Total open inguinal hernia volume was a negative contributor (-10). CONCLUSION: We conclude, in the short term, robotic surgical costs are not behaving as traditional fixed costs in outpatient, unilateral inguinal hernia surgeries. Hospital methodology for cost assignment and increased robotic fixed costs such as purchase of additional instruments may explain these results.

Disparities in coronary artery bypass grafting between high- and low-volume surgeons and hospitals.

Background: High-volume surgeons and hospitals performing coronary artery bypass grafting have been associated with improved patient outcomes. However, patients of increased socioeconomic distress may have worse outcomes because of health care disparities. We sought to identify trends and outcomes in patients of elevated distress undergoing bypass grafting. Methods: The Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration administrative data set was merged with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician and Hospital Compare and Economic Innovation Group Distressed Community Index data sets to build a comprehensive database. The data set was queried to identify patients undergoing coronary artery bypass procedures between 2016 and 2020. High- and low-volume hospitals and surgeons were compared. Patient and hospital demographics, comorbidities, length of stay, and postoperative complications were analyzed by χ2 and t test where appropriate. Results: A total of 41,571 coronary artery bypass grafting procedures were performed by 174 surgeons at 67 Florida hospitals. Low- and high-volume hospitals did not differ with respect to hospital ownership, overall star rating, national comparisons of mortality, readmission, or cost effectiveness. Patients from at-risk and distressed communities were more likely to undergo surgery at low-volume hospitals. Hospital length of stay was increased for low-volume hospitals (10.2 vs 9.4 days, P < .05). Postoperative complications including pneumonia, arrhythmia, respiratory failure, acute renal failure, shock, pleural effusion, and sepsis were more frequent at low-volume hospitals and for low-volume surgeons. Conclusion: High-volume hospitals and surgeons have improved postoperative outcomes and hospital length of stay when compared to low-volume hospitals and surgeons performing coronary artery bypass grafting. At-risk and distressed populations are more likely to undergo bypass surgery at low-volume hospitals, potentially contributing to worse patient outcome. Efforts should be made to mitigate the potential impact of low socioeconomic status to improve outcomes in this population.

Outcomes of Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Distressed Socioeconomic Communities.

Objective Patients of low socioeconomic status have an increased risk of complications following cardiac surgery. We aimed to identify disparities in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement using the Distressed Communities Index (DCI), a comparative measure of community well-being. The DCI incorporates seven distinct socioeconomic indicators into a single composite score to depict the economic well-being of a community. Methods The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database (HCUP-SID) for Florida and Washington was queried to identify patients undergoing surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR], transcatheter aortic valve replacement [TAVR]) between 2012-2015. Patients undergoing TAVR and SAVR were propensity-matched and stratified based on the quintile of DCI score. A distressed community was defined as those in quintiles 4 and 5 (at-risk and distressed, respectively); a non-distressed community was defined as those in quintiles 1 and 2 (prosperous and comfortable, respectively). Outcomes following aortic valve replacement were compared across groups in distressed communities. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline covariates between groups. Results A total of 27,591 patients underwent aortic valve replacement. After propensity matching, 5,331 patients were identified in each TAVR and SAVR group. Distressed TAVR patients had lower rates of postoperative pneumonia (7.6% vs. 3.8%, p<0.001), sepsis (3.6% vs. 1.9%, p<0.05), and cardiac complications (15.4% vs. 7.5%, p<0.001) when compared to highly distressed SAVR patients. When comparing distressed SAVR and TAVR and low distressed SAVR and TAVR groups, no significant difference was found in postoperative outcomes, except distressed TAVR experienced more cases of UTI. Conclusions Highly distressed TAVR patients had lower incidences of postoperative sepsis, pneumonia, and cardiac complications when compared to the highly distressed SAVR cohort. Patients undergoing TAVR in highly distressed communities had an increased incidence of postoperative urinary tract infection. DCI may be a useful adjunct to current risk scoring systems.

Introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement technology increases overall aortic valve surgical volume: Evaluating the Florida experience.

OBJECTIVE: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement technology is increasingly used for aortic valve stenosis. We sought to evaluate the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement technology with respect to overall surgical aortic valve replacement volume in Florida. METHODS: The 2010-2019 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration data set was queried. Difference-in-difference analysis was used to evaluate the impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement on the total aortic valve surgical volume of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus nonperforming hospitals. Length of stay and elements of charges were compared for the raw and 1:1 propensity matched data. RESULTS: A total of 46,032 surgical aortic valve procedures were performed at 88 hospitals. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement performing hospitals experienced a 21% increase in total aortic valve surgical volume. Length of stay was significantly less for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Propensity matched transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients had less gross total charges. CONCLUSION: Introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement technology significantly increased overall surgical aortic valve volume and may be associated with less gross total hospital charges.

State-Level Examination of Clinical Outcomes and Costs for Robotic and Laparoscopic Approach to Diaphragmatic Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND: Published studies evaluating the effect of robotic assistance on clinical outcomes and costs of care in diaphragmatic hernia repair (DHR) have been limited. STUDY DESIGN: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases for Florida were queried to identify patients undergoing transabdominal DHR between 2011 and 2018 and associated inpatient and outpatient encounters within 12 months after the index operation. Patients undergoing robotic DHR were 1:1:1 propensity score-matched for age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidity score, case priority, payer, and facility volume with patients undergoing open and laparoscopic DHR. RESULTS: There were 5,962 patients (67.3%) who underwent laparoscopic DHR, 1,520 (17.2%) who underwent open DHR, and 1,376 (15.5%) who underwent robotic DHR. On comparison of matched cohorts, median index length of stay (3 days; interquartile range [IQR] 2 to 5 days vs 2 days; IQR 1 to 4 days; p < 0.001) and index hospitalization costs ($17,236; IQR $13,231 to $22,183 vs $12,087; IQR $8,881 to $17,439; p < 0.001) for robotic DHR were greater than for laparoscopic DHR. Median length of stay for open DHR (6 days; IQR 4 to 10 days) was longer than that for both laparoscopic and robotic DHR. Median index hospitalization costs for open DHR ($16,470; IQR $11,152 to $23,768) were greater than those for laparoscopic DHR, but less than those for robotic DHR. There were no significant differences between cohorts in the overall rate of post-index care. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic DHR is the most cost-effective approach to DHR. Robotic assistance provides clinical outcomes comparable with laparoscopic DHR, but is associated with increased index cost.

Laparoscopic partial hepatectomy is cost-effective when performed in high volume centers: A five state analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies comparing the efficacy of laparoscopic (LHR) and open hepatic resection (OHR) have not evaluated inpatient costs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases to identify patients undergoing hepatic resection between 2010 and 2014. RESULTS: 10,239 patients underwent hepatic resection. 865 (8%) underwent LHR and 9374 (92%) underwent OHR. On adjusting for hospital volume, patients undergoing LHR had a lower risk of respiratory (OR 0.64, 95% CI [0.52, 0.78]), wound (OR 0.48; 95% CI [0.29, 0.79]) and hematologic (OR 0.57; 95% CI [0.44, 0.73]) complication as well as a lower risk of being in the highest quartile of cost (0.58; 95% CI [0.43, 0.77]) than those undergoing OHR. Patients undergoing LHR in very high volume (>314 hepatectomies/year) centers had lower risk-adjusted 90-day aggregate costs of care than those undergoing OHR (-$8022; 95% CI [-$11,732, -$4311). DISCUSSION: Laparoscopic partial hepatectomy is associated with lower risk of postoperative complication than OHR. This translates to lower aggregate costs in very high-volume centers.

Defining the relative contribution of health care environmental components to patient outcomes in the model of 30-day readmission after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes following health care interventions may be dependent on a variety of factors: patient, surgeon, hospital, information technology, and temporal, cultural, and socioeconomic factors, among others. In this study, we characterize the relative contribution of each of these factors using a model of 30-day readmission following coronary artery bypass graft. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, the American Hospital Association Annual Health Survey Databases, the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, and the Distressed Communities Index from 2010 to 2013 were linked for Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, and Washington. Logistic regression, random forest, decision tree, gradient boosting, k-nearest-neighbors classification, and XGBoost tree models were implemented. Modeling results were compared on the basis of predictive accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve. Decision tree performed best and was selected for further analysis. A gradient-boosted model was used to quantify factor contribution. RESULTS: The model had 45,352 patients, 54,096 admissions, and a 16.2% 30-day readmission rate after coronary artery bypass graft. The top 10 predictors were disposition at discharge, number of chronic conditions, total procedures, median household income, adults without high school diplomas, primary payer method, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comorbidity: renal failure, patient location (urban-rural), admission type, and age categories. The top 3 socioeconomic predictors were estimated state median household income, adults without high school diplomas, and patient location (urban versus rural designation). The relative contribution of patient/temporal, socioeconomic, hospital information technology, and hospital factors to readmission is 83.45%, 5.71%, 6.34%, and 4.31%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this model, the contribution of socioeconomic factors is substantive but lags significantly behind patient/temporal factors. With ever increasing availability of data, identification of contributors to patient outcomes within the overall health care macroenvironment will allow prioritization of interventions.

Discharge timing: Does targeting an ideal length of stay for patients undergoing colectomy impact readmissions and costs of care?

INTRODUCTION: In colorectal surgery, enhanced recovery protocols reduce length-of-stay (LOS). Concerns remain about increased readmission rates. Using a predictive model targeting ideal LOS (iLOS), we evaluate the impact of discharge timing on readmission. METHODS: The HCUP-SID and AHA databases combined patient and hospital-level data from four states. Colectomy patients were stratified and propensity-matched based. We predicted iLOS using multivariate linear regression, created a discharge timing variable and used multivariate logistic regression to analyze 30-day and 90-day readmissions. RESULTS: Of 100,701 patients, 6903 (6.85%) were Lap-Left, 16,883 (16.77%) were Open-Left, 32,173 (31.95%) were Lap-Right, and 44,742 (44.43%) were Open-Right. Very early discharge (>4d before iLOS) and very late discharge (>4d after iLOS) were predictors of readmission in Lap- Left (p < 0.05) and Open-Right (p < 0.05). In Lap-Right, early discharge was a significant predictor of readmission (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Targeting using iLOS may optimize discharge timing after colectomy and avoid unplanned readmissions.

The paradox of the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair in the inpatient setting.

BACKGROUND: Robotics offers improved ergonomics, enhanced visualization, and increased dexterity. Disadvantages include startup, maintenance and instrument costs. Surgeon education notwithstanding, we hypothesized that robotic inguinal hernia repair carries minimal advantages over the open or laparoscopic approach in the inpatient setting. METHODS: The HCUP-SID and AHA datasets were queried for inguinal hernia repair codes. Hospital and patient demographic, financial and comorbidity data were evaluated. Data are presented as mean ±â€¯SEM. RESULTS: 36396 cases (27776 Open, 7104 Laparoscopic and 1516 Robotic) were identified. Total costs were: $13595 ±â€¯104 (Open), $13581 ±â€¯176 (Laparoscopic) and $18494 ±â€¯323 (Robotic). (p < 0.0001 Robotic vs Open, Robotic vs Laparoscopic) Robotic costs were 38% greater than that of the Open and Laparoscopic subsets (p < 0.001 Robotic vs. Open and Laparoscopic). The Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic subsets' length of stay were 4.2, 3.2 and 2.3 days, respectively. (p < 0.0001 among Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic). CONCLUSION: The Robotic approach to the inguinal hernia repair had the lowest length of stay, despite having the highest costs. The benefits of robotic surgery in inguinal hernia repair are unclear in the inpatient setting.