The "weekend effect" in urgent general operative procedures.

BACKGROUND: There is growing concern that the quality of inpatient care may differ on weekends versus weekdays. We assessed the "weekend effect" in common urgent general operative procedures. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Florida State Inpatient Database (2007-2010) was queried to identify inpatient stays with urgent or emergent admissions and surgery on the same day. Included were patients undergoing appendectomy, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, and hernia repair for obstructed/gangrenous hernia. Outcomes included duration of stay, inpatient mortality, hospital-adjusted charges, and postoperative complications. Controlling for hospital and patient characteristics and type of surgery, we used multilevel mixed-effects regression modeling to examine associations between patient outcomes and admissions day (weekend vs weekday). RESULTS: A total of 80,861 same-day surgeries were identified, of which 19,078 (23.6%) occurred during the weekend. Patients operated on during the weekend had greater charges by $185 (P < .05), rates of wound complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.29, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.05-1.58; P < .05), and urinary tract infection (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.05-1.85; P < .05). Patients undergoing appendectomy had greater rates of transfusion (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.87; P = .01), wound complications (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04-1.68; P < .05), urinary tract infection (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.17-2.67; P < .01), and pneumonia (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.88; P < .05). Patients undergoing cholecystectomy had a greater duration of stay (P = .001) and greater charges (P = .003). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing weekend surgery for common, urgent general operations are at risk for increased postoperative complications, duration of stay, and hospital charges. Because the cause of the "weekend effect" is still unknown, future studies should focus on elucidating the characteristics that may overcome this disparity.

Obesity and trends in malpractice claims for physicians and surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of obesity has altered the practice of medicine and surgery, with the emergence of new operations and medications. We hypothesized that the landscape of medical malpractice claims has also changed. METHODS: We queried the Physician Insurers Association of American database for 1990 through 1999 and 2000 through 2009 for cases corresponding to International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition, codes for obesity. We extracted adjudicatory outcome, closed and paid claims data, indemnity payments, primary alleged error codes, National Association of Insurance Commissioners severity of injury class, procedural codes, and medical specialty data. RESULTS: A total of 411 obesity claims were filed from 1990 to 1999 and 1,591 obesity claims were filed from 2000 to 2009. General surgery was the specialty with the greatest number of obesity claims from 1990 to 1999 and was second to family practice for 2000 to 2009. Although the percentage of paid general surgery obesity claims has decreased significantly from 69% in 1990-1999 to 36% in 2000-2009, the mean indemnity payments have increased substantially ($94,000 to $368,000). CONCLUSION: Recently, the percentage of paid general surgery obesity claims has significantly decreased; however, individual and total indemnity payments have increased. Obesity continues to impact general surgery malpractice substantially. Efforts to manage this component of physician and hospital practices must continue.

Comparing 20 years of national general surgery malpractice claims data: obesity versus morbid obesity.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the increasing body mass index of the population has affected general surgery malpractice claims. METHODS: We queried the Physician Insurers Association of America database from 1990 to 1999 (ie, period 1) and 2000 to 2009 (ie, period 2) for claims associated with obesity and morbid obesity. We analyzed the error involved, injury severity, procedure, and outcome. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-five claims were identified. The percentage of paid claims did not differ by body mass index. Improper performance was the most common alleged error, gastric bypass was the most common procedure, and death was the most common injury. For obesity claims, the case was more likely to be settled in period 1 and withdrawn/dismissed in period 2 (P < .001). The number of morbid obesity claims rose from 9 in period 1 to 249 in period 2. CONCLUSIONS: The significant rise in morbid obesity claims between periods is likely caused by the substantial increase in the number of bariatric procedures performed.

Impact of business infrastructure on financial metrics in departments of surgery.

BACKGROUND: In the current environment, pressure is ever increasing to maximize financial performance in surgery departments. Factors such as physician extenders, billing and collection, payor mix, contracting, incentives from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and administrative incentives may greatly influence financial performance. However, despite a plethora of information from the University HealthSystem Consortium and the Association of American Medical Colleges, best-practice information for business infrastructure is lacking. To obtain a sampling of current practices, we conducted a survey of departments of surgery. METHODS: An anonymous 30-question survey addressing demographics, productivity, revenue and expense profile, payor mix, physician extender and staff personnel, billing and collections methodology, and financial performance was distributed among members of the Society of Surgical Chairs via SurveyMonkey. This was approved by the Loyola Institutional Research Board. Multivariate linear regression analyses and t tests/rank-sum tests were performed, as appropriate. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. RESULTS: A total of 25 (19%) departments responded; 14 were integrated with the hospital/health system, and 11 were integrated with the medical school. In 60% (n = 15), the main hospital had 500 to 1,000 beds; 48% (n = 12) had >4 hospitals in their system. For FY10, MD clinical full-time equivalents (FTEs) were 49 ± 10; total work relative value units (wRVUs) were 320 ± 8 k; and total billed cases were 43 ± 16 k. A total of 23 of 25 used physician-extenders with an average of 18 ± 5 per department and in 22 of 23, the physician extenders billed. On average, there were 18 ± 6 clinical-support staff, 25 ± 11 front-office staff, and 13 ± 3 back-office support staff FTEs. Among these FTEs, there were 16 ± 5 devoted to business operations (billing, coding, denial/claims management, financial oversight). Collections/wRVUs were $60 ± 3 (range, 39-80). Regression modeling demonstrated that total wRVUs were determined by the number of MD FTEs (P = .01), number of physician extenders (P = .01), number of front-office staff (P = .01), number of back-office staff (P = .02), and number of total business staff (P = .01). Collections/wRVUs were predicted by number of hospitals (P = .04), number of MD FTEs (P = .03), number of physician extenders (P = .01), and number of cases/total business staff (P = .02). Interestingly, wRVUs/MD was predicted by number of MD FTEs (P = .01) but were not greatly impacted by numbers of clinical or business support staff. In 4 of 25, the billing and coding staff were incentivized and had a Collections/wRVU = 64 ± 5 whereas nonincentivized staff had collections/wRVU = 59 ± 3. (P = NS) Also, %Accounts receivable >90 days (15% vs 25%) were not substantially different. Only 48% (12/25) have departments have recouped Centers for Medicare and Medicaid dollars for Physician Quality Reporting Initiative, Meaningful Use, Patient-Centered Medical Homes, or other Accountable Care-like programs. One-half (13) of the departments had both an inpatient and outpatient electronic medical record. Finally, on a scale of 1-10 (10 = highest), the average level of satisfaction with billing and collections processes was 6. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the physician extender, clinical support staff, and business staff environment can impact surgeon productivity, and there is opportunity for improvement. Determining best practices for ratios of support staff/MD and optimizing the role of electronic medical record in workflow and billing/collections are critical in the current environment. Our pilot study requires extension across more institutions for validation.