Oncological Safety of Autologous Fat Grafting for Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat grafting has become a vital component of breast reconstruction. However, concerns remain regarding the safety of fat grafting after oncological resection and breast reconstruction. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association of fat grafting after breast reconstruction with metastasis and death in breast cancer patients. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using deidentified claims data from 2001 to 2018 and included privately insured patients with breast cancer who underwent breast reconstruction after surgical resection. Breast reconstruction patients who underwent fat grafting were compared with those not undergoing fat grafting, evaluating metastasis and death up to 15 years after reconstruction. One-to-one propensity score matching was used to account for selection bias on patient risk factors comparing those with and without fat grafting. RESULTS: A total of 4709 patients were identified who underwent breast reconstruction after lumpectomy or mastectomy, of which 368 subsequently underwent fat grafting. In the propensity score-matched patients, fat grafting was not associated with an increased risk of lymph node metastasis (9.7% fat-grafted vs 11.4% in non-fat-grafted, P = 0.47) or distant metastasis (9.1% fat-grafted vs 10.5% in non-fat-grafted, P = 0.53). There was no increased risk of all-cause mortality after fat grafting for breast reconstruction (3.9% fat-grafted vs 6.6% non-fat-grafted, P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Among breast cancer patients who subsequently underwent fat grafting, compared with no fat grafting, no significant increase was observed in distant metastasis or all-cause mortality. These findings suggest that autologous fat grafting after oncologic resection and reconstruction was not associated with an increased risk of future metastasis or death.

An Analysis of Surgeon Experience, Diagnostic Testing, and Treatment Recommendation For Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

PURPOSE: The diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) can be made clinically using the Carpal Tunnel Syndrome-6 (CTS-6) criteria. The role of electrodiagnostic studies (EDS) is controversial. We examined differences in the utilization of CTS-6 and EDS based on surgeon experience and practice setting. METHODS: Members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand were emailed an anonymous web-based link to participate. The survey included an assessment of hypothetical CTS scenarios with varying clinical severity. We collected surgeon demographic attributes, years in practice, practice setting, and frequency of CTS-6 and EDS utilization. A comparison was made of years of experience with surgeon-reported utilization of CTS-6 and EDS as well as treatment recommendation. RESULTS: We received 771 responses (25% response rate). Surgeons recommended carpal tunnel release (CTR) for patients without EDS (16%), normal EDS (33%), and abnormal EDS (90%). Fifty-three percent of surgeons with <15 years in practice reported often/always using CTS-6 criteria in their practice compared to 30% and 29% of surgeons with 16-30 years and > 30 years in practice, respectively. Surgeons with 16-30 and >30 years in practice had significantly lower odds of reporting often/almost always using CTS-6 relative to surgeons with 1-15 years in practice (OR 0.35 and 0.31, respectively). A greater proportion of surgeons with 16-30 years (68%) and >30 years (65.5%) in practice responded often/almost always applying EDS compared to surgeons with <15 years (56%) in practice. In addition, surgeons with 16-30 years and >30 years in practice had a higher odds of often/always using EDS (ORs 1.74 and 1.98, respectively) compared to surgeons with 1-15 years in practice (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of CTS-6 and EDS varied based on years in practice. This difference may reflect changing guidelines, the growing evidence regarding clinical assessment tools, and the emergence of other diagnostic modalities. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given the expense and invasiveness of EDS, opportunities to integrate clinical assessment tools readily into the diagnostic algorithm may shift the role of EDS toward selective utilization for complex clinical scenarios rather than for routine use.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Rates of Pressure Injuries Among Hospitalized Patients across the US.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) rates and composition of HAPI stages among hospitalized patients across the US. METHODS: Using encounter-level data from a nationwide healthcare insurance claims database, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study and an interrupted time-series analysis to determine HAPI rates among hospitalized patients within 90 days of admission before (January 2018 to February 2020) and after (March 2020 to December 2020) the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of 3,418,438 adult patients assessed for inclusion in the study, 1,750,494 met the inclusion criteria. Outcomes measured included the presence of a HAPI within 90 days of admission and HAPI stage based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision diagnosis codes. RESULTS: The authors identified HAPIs in 59,175 episodes of care, representing 59,019 unique patients and corresponding to an overall HAPI rate of 2.65%. Baseline characteristics did not vary significantly across the two time periods. Further, HAPI rates were consistent across the time periods analyzed with no significant differences in rates following the onset of the pandemic (P = .303). Composition of HAPI stages remained consistent across the pandemic (unspecified, stages 1-4, Ps = .62, .80, .22, .23, and .52, respectively) except for a significant decrease in unstageable/deep tissue pressure injuries (-0.088%, P = .0134). CONCLUSIONS: Although hospital resources were strained at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, no differences were identified in HAPI rates among the study's cohort of privately insured patients.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome as a Test Case for Value Assessment During the Presurgical Period: The Impact of Structure and Processes of Care.

BACKGROUND: Few performance measures assess presurgical value (quality and utilization). OBJECTIVES: Using carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) as a case study: (1) develop a model to evaluate presurgical quality and utilization and (2) identify opportunities for value improvement. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study utilizing Veterans Affairs (VA) national administrative data. SUBJECTS: Patients who were evaluated in a VA primary care clinic on at least 1 occasion for CTS and received carpal tunnel release over a 7-year period. MEASURES: We modeled facility-level performance on 2 outcomes: surgical delay (marker of quality) and number of presurgical encounters (utilization) for CTS, and examined association between patient, facility, and care process variables and performance. RESULTS: Among 41,912 Veterans undergoing carpal tunnel release at 127 VA medical centers, the median facility-level predicted probability of surgical delay was 48%, with 16 (13%) facilities having significantly less delay than the median and 13 (10%) facilities having greater delay. The median facility-level predicted number of presurgical encounters was 8.8 visits, with 22 (17%) facilities having significantly fewer encounters and 22 (17%) facilities having more. Care processes had a stronger association with both outcomes than structural variables included in the models. Processes associated with the greatest deviations in predicted delay and utilization included receipt of repeat electrodiagnostic testing, use of 2 or more nonoperative treatments, and community referral outside of VA. CONCLUSIONS: Using CTS as a test case, this study demonstrates the potential to assess presurgical value and identify modifiable care processes associated with presurgical delay and utilization performance.

Identifying Strategies to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Testing for Low-Risk Procedures: a Qualitative Study of Facilities with High or Recently Improved Levels of Testing.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare agencies and perioperative professional organizations recommend avoiding preoperative screening tests for low-risk surgical procedures. However, low-value preoperative tests are still commonly ordered even for generally healthy patients and active strategies to reduce this testing have not been adequately described. OBJECTIVE: We sought to learn from hospitals with either high levels of testing or that had recently reduced use of low-value screening tests (aka "delta sites") about reasons for testing and active deimplementation strategies they used to effectively improve practice. DESIGN: Qualitative study of semi-structured telephone interviews. PARTICIPANTS: We identified facilities in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with high or recently improved burden of potentially low-value preoperative testing for carpal tunnel release and cataract surgery. We recruited perioperative clinicians to participate. APPROACH: Questions focused on reasons to order preoperative screening tests for patients undergoing low-risk surgery and, more importantly, what strategies had been successfully used to reduce testing. A framework method was used to identify common improvement strategies and specific care delivery innovations. KEY RESULTS: Thirty-five perioperative clinicians (e.g., hand surgeons, ophthalmologists, anesthesiologists, primary care providers, directors of preoperative clinics, nurses) from 29 VHA facilities participated. Facilities that successfully reduced the burden of low-value testing shared many improvement strategies (e.g., building consensus among stakeholders; using evidence/norm-based education and persuasion; clarifying responsibility for ordering tests) to implement different care delivery innovations (e.g., pre-screening to decide if a preop clinic evaluation is necessary; establishing a dedicated preop clinic for low-risk procedures). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a menu of common improvement strategies and specific care delivery innovations that might be helpful for institutions trying to design their own quality improvement programs to reduce low-value preoperative testing given their unique structure, resources, and constraints.

Engaging Operational Partners Is Critical for Successful Implementation of Research Products: a Coincidence Analysis of Access-Related Projects in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has prioritized timely access to care and has invested substantially in research aimed at optimizing veteran access. However, implementing research into practice remains challenging. Here, we assessed the implementation status of recent VHA access-related research projects and explored factors associated with successful implementation. DESIGN: We conducted a portfolio review of recent VHA-funded or supported projects (1/2015-7/2020) focused on healthcare access ("Access Portfolio"). We then identified projects with implementable research deliverables by excluding those that (1) were non-research/operational projects; (2) were only recently completed (i.e., completed on or after 1/1/2020, meaning that they were unlikely to have had time to be implemented); and (3) did not propose an implementable deliverable. An electronic survey assessed each project's implementation status and elicited barriers/facilitators to implementing deliverables. Results were analyzed using novel Coincidence Analysis (CNA) methods. PARTICIPANTS/KEY RESULTS: Among 286 Access Portfolio projects, 36 projects led by 32 investigators across 20 VHA facilities were included. Twenty-nine respondents completed the survey for 32 projects (response rate = 88.9%). Twenty-eight percent of projects reported fully implementing project deliverables, 34% reported partially implementing deliverables, and 37% reported not implementing any deliverables (i.e., resulting tool/intervention not implemented into practice). Of 14 possible barriers/facilitators assessed in the survey, two were identified through CNA as "difference-makers" to partial or full implementation of project deliverables: (1) engagement with national VHA operational leadership; (2) support and commitment from local site operational leadership. CONCLUSIONS: These findings empirically highlight the importance of operational leadership engagement for successful implementation of research deliverables. Efforts to strengthen communication and engagement between the research community and VHA local/national operational leaders should be expanded to ensure VHA's investment in research leads to meaningful improvements in veterans' care. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has prioritized timely access to care and has invested substantially in research aimed at optimizing veteran access. However, implementing research findings into clinical practice remains challenging, both within and outside VHA. Here, we assessed the implementation status of recent VHA access-related research projects and explored factors associated with successful implementation. Only two factors were identified as "difference-makers" to adoption of project findings into practice: (1) engagement with national VHA leadership or (2) support and commitment from local site leadership. These findings highlight the importance of leadership engagement for successful implementation of research findings. Efforts to strengthen communication and engagement between the research community and VHA local/national leaders should be expanded to ensure VHA's investment in research leads to meaningful improvements in veterans' care.

Health-Care Patterns for Three Common Elective Surgeries: Implications for Bundled Payment Models.

INTRODUCTION: The study objectives were to assess the timing, duration, and nature of health-care service utilization before and after three common elective surgical procedures not currently included in federal episode-based bundled payment programs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing one of three low-risk surgical procedures (breast reduction, upper extremity nerve decompression, and panniculectomy) between 2010 and 2017 using a private insurer's national claims database. All professional and facility billing claims for health-care services were identified during the 12-mo preoperative and 12-mo postoperative periods for each patient. We compared trends in monthly utilization of health-care services to estimate surgery-related utilization patterns with interrupted time series analyses. RESULTS: The cohort included 7885 patients receiving breast reduction, 99,404 patients receiving upper extremity nerve decompression, and 955 patients receiving panniculectomy. The mean monthly encounters gradually increased before each procedure, with a gradual decline in services postoperatively. Claims in the preoperative period for all procedures were primarily diagnostic testing and outpatient evaluation and management. There was limited use of postacute care services across the surgical procedures. There were notable differences in service utilization between the three surgeries, including differing inflection points for preoperative services (approximately 7 mo for breast reduction and panniculectomy, compared with at least 9 mo for nerve decompression) and postoperative services (up to 3 mo for panniculectomy and 4 mo for nerve decompression, compared with 6 mo for breast reduction). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights important differences in utilization of health-care services by type of surgery. These findings suggest that prior to expanding episode-based bundled payment models to surgical conditions with limited utilization of postacute care services and fewer complications, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and private payers should consider tailoring the timing and duration of clinical episodes to individual surgical procedures.

Evaluating the Role of Mentorship in Career Advancement: A Survey of Women in Academic Hand Surgery.

PURPOSE: Despite the increasing percentage of women within the American Society for Surgery of the Hand, women remain underrepresented within leadership in academic hand surgery. Although this disparity in leadership representation may be improving, we aimed to investigate the role mentorship plays in advancing women in academic hand surgery. METHODS: This is a survey-based, mixed-methods study. A written survey assessing themes in personal and professional experiences with mentorship was sent to hand fellowship-trained women. Inclusion criteria were the completion of a hand fellowship and current affiliation with an academic institution. An evolved grounded theory framework was used to evaluate the responses. Themes were identified based on common responses. RESULTS: Of 186 eligible participants, 144 (85.2%) received the survey. The response rate was 48.6%. Respondents indicated that residency was the stage at which mentorship was most impactful (n = 25, 37%), and half of the respondents identified their desire to work in academic hand surgery during residency (n = 35, 50%). Obstacles to finding a mentor included lack of availability (n = 46, 67.7%), hesitance in searching for a mentor (n = 16, 23.5%), and searching for a mentor within an environment that was not conducive to success for trainees (n = 7, 10.3%). Most (84%) cited instances were the ones having the advice of a woman mentor was more impactful than that of a mentor who is a man. The reported need for same-sex mentorship fell into three categories: (1) insight into shared experiences, (2) assistance with conflict/bias management, and (3) support during career navigation. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate the need for high-quality mentorship during the residency with a specific emphasis on same-sex mentorship. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings provide clear objectives related to improving access to and quality of mentorship. This foundational understanding will enrich mentor-mentee relationships, allowing for greater personal and professional success and satisfaction for both parties.

Video-Based Assessment of Microsurgical Trainees: An Evaluation of Gender Bias.

BACKGROUND: Gender bias in graduate medical evaluations remains a challenging issue. This study evaluates implicit gender bias in video-based evaluations of microsurgical technique, which has not previously been described in the literature. METHODS: Two videos were recorded of microsurgical anastomosis; the first was performed by a hand/microsurgery fellow and the second by an expert microsurgeon. A total of 150 surgeons with microsurgical experience were recruited to evaluate the videos; they were told these videos depicted a surgical trainee 1 month into fellowship followed by the same trainee 10 months later. The only variable was the name ("Rachel" or "David") that each participant was randomly assigned to evaluate. Participants were asked to score each video for quality, technique, efficiency, as well as overall progression and development after the second video compared with the initial video. To focus on bias, these outcome measures were selected to be purposefully subjective and all ratings were based on a subjective 1to 10 scale (10 = excellent). RESULTS: The analysis included 150 participants (75% male). There were no statistically significant differences in scores between the "female" and "male" trainee. The trainees received the same median initial (1-month video) and final (11th-month video) scores for all criteria except initial technique, in which the female trainee received a 7 and the male trainee received an 8. Notably, 11-month scores were consistently the same or lower than 1-month scores for both study groups (p < 0.001). There were also no differences within either study group based on participant sex. Microsurgery practitioners overall rated both groups lower than those who do not currently practice microsurgery. CONCLUSION: Our study did not identify a gender bias in this evaluation method. Further investigation into how we assess and grade trainees as well as the presence and impact of implicit biases on varying surgical assessment methods is warranted.

Do Proposed Quality Measures for Carpal Tunnel Release Reveal Important Quality Gaps and Are They Reliable?

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons recently proposed quality measures for the initial surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). One measure addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release; and a second measure addressed avoidance of routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy (OT/PT) after carpal tunnel release. However, for quality measures to serve their intended purposes, they must be tested in real-world data to establish that gaps in quality exist and that the measures yield reliable performance information. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is there an important quality gap in clinical practice for avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release? (2) Is there an important quality gap in avoiding routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy after carpal tunnel release? (3) Do these two quality measures have adequate beta-binomial signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and split-sample reliability (SSR)? METHODS: This retrospective comparative study used a large national private insurance claims database, the 2018 Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart. Ideally, healthcare quality measures are tested within data reflective of the providers and payors to which the measures will be applied. We previously tested these measures in a large public healthcare system and a single academic medical center. In this study, we sought to test the measures in the broader context of patients and providers using private insurance. For both measures, we included the first carpal tunnel release from 28,083 patients performed by one of 7236 surgeons, irrespective of surgical specialty (including, orthopaedic, plastic, neuro-, and general surgery). To calculate surgeon-level descriptive and reliability statistics, analyses were focused on the 66% (18,622 of 28,083) of patients who received their procedure from one of the 24% (1740 of 7236) of surgeons with at least five carpal tunnel releases in the database. No other inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied. To determine whether the measures reveal important gaps in treatment quality (avoidance of adjunctive procedures and routine therapy), we calculated descriptive statistics (median and interquartile range) of the performance distribution stratified by surgeon-level annual volume of carpal tunnel releases in the database (5+, 10+, 15+, 20+, 25+, and 30+). Like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), we considered a measure "topped out" if median performance was greater than 95%, meaning the opportunity for further quality improvement is low. We calculated the surgeon-level beta-binomial SNR and SSR for each measure, each stratified by the number of carpal tunnel releases performed by each surgeon in the database. These are standard measures of reliability in health care quality measurement science. The SNR quantifies the proportion of variance that is between rather than within surgeons, and the SSR is the correlation of performance scores when each surgeons' patients are split into two random samples and then corrected for sample size. RESULTS: We found that 2% (308 of 18,622) of carpal tunnel releases involved an adjunctive procedure. The results showed that avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release had a median (IQR) performance of 100% (100% to 100%) at all case volumes. Only 8% (144 of 1740) of surgeons with at least five cases in the database had less than 100% performance, and only 5% (84 of 1740) had less than 90% performance. This means adjunctive procedures were rarely performed and an important quality gap does not exist based on the CMS criterion. Regarding the avoidance of routine therapy, there was a larger quality gap: For surgeons with at least five cases in the database, median performance was 89% (75% to 100%), and 25% (435 of 1740) of these surgeons had less than 75% performance. This signifies that the measure is not topped out and may reveal an important quality gap. Most patients receiving clinic-based OT/PT had only one visit in the 6 weeks after surgery. Median (IQR) SNRs of the first measure, which addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures, and the second measure, which addresses avoidance of routine use clinic-based OT/PT, were 1.00 (1.00 to 1.00) and 0.86 (0.67 to 1.00), respectively. The SSR for these measures were 0.87 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.88) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.77), respectively. All of these reliability statistics exceed National Quality Forum's emerging minimum standard of 0.60. CONCLUSION: The first measure, the avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release, lacked an important quality gap suggesting it is unlikely to be useful in driving improvements. The second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, revealed a larger quality gap and had very good reliability, suggesting it may be useful for quality monitoring and improvement purposes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As healthcare systems and payors use the second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, to encourage adherence to clinical practice guidelines (such as provider profiling, public reporting, and payment policies), it will be critically important to consider what proportion of patients receiving OT/PT should be considered routine practice and therefore inconsistent with guidelines. The value or potential harm of this measure depends on this judgement.

Utilization of Diagnostic Testing for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Survey of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand.

PURPOSE: In 2016, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) changed the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome, relaxing the recommendation for electrodiagnostic studies (EDS) prior to offering surgery. However, it is unknown how the updated guidelines changed the practice patterns of hand surgeons. METHODS: A web-based multiple-choice survey was sent to the members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand. We assessed the current diagnostic practice patterns of hand surgeons. The survey was pretested using expert review with content and survey methodology experts and cognitively tested to ensure readability and understandability. RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 770 hand surgeons. Approximately 26% of respondents required EDS prior to seeing a patient in consultation, and 56% of members routinely ordered EDS after evaluating a patient with carpal tunnel syndrome if testing was not performed prior to evaluation. The top reasons for obtaining EDS were to provide additional information for unclear diagnoses (97% selected), for patients with worker's compensation (82% selected), for grading the severity (73% selected), and to provide a baseline examination in the event of persistent symptoms (72% selected). However, only 38% of respondents believed that the current AAOS CPGs were appropriate, and 43% of respondents did not know what the guidelines recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the change in AAOS CPGs, EDS continues to be ubiquitously used for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Nevertheless, a substantial proportion of hand surgeons are unaware of the recommendations for EDS within the AAOS CPGs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings highlight the importance of explicitly defining which patients and which clinical scenarios would benefit from additional diagnostic testing and identifying strategies for more widespread dissemination of guidelines.

The Impact of Community Care Referral on Time to Surgery for Veterans With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) enacted policies offering Veterans care in the community, aiming to improve access challenges. However, the impact of receipt of community care on wait times for Veterans receiving surgical care is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To compare wait times for surgery for Veterans with carpal tunnel syndrome who receive VA care plus community care (mixed care) and those who receive care solely within the VA (VA-only). RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Veterans undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR) between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2016. MEASURES: Our primary outcome was time from primary care physician (PCP) referral to CTR. RESULTS: Of the 29,242 Veterans undergoing CTR, 23,330 (79.8%) received VA-only care and 5912 (20.1%) received mixed care. Veterans receiving mixed care had significantly longer time from PCP referral to CTR (median mixed care: 378 days; median VA-only care: 176 days, P<0.001). After controlling for patient and facility covariates, mixed care was associated with a 37% increased time from PCP referral to CTR (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.65). Each additional service provided in the community was associated with a 23% increase in time to surgery (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: VA-only care was associated with a shorter time to surgery compared with mixed care. Moreover, there were additional delays for each service received in the community. With likely increases in Veterans seeking community care, strategies must be used to identify and mitigate sources of delay through the spectrum of care between referral and definitive treatment.

Surgical Timing for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Comparison of Health Care Delivery in the Veterans Administration and Private Sector.

PURPOSE: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system monitors time from referral to specialist visit. We compared wait times for carpal tunnel release (CTR) at a VA hospital and its academic affiliate. METHODS: We selected patients who underwent CTR at a VA hospital and its academic affiliate (AA) (2010-2015). We analyzed time from primary care physician (PCP) referral to CTR, which was subdivided into PCP referral to surgical consultation and surgical consultation to CTR. Electrodiagnostic testing (EDS) was categorized in relation to surgical consultation (prereferral vs postreferral). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine associations between clinical variables and surgical location. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2015, VA patients had a shorter median time from PCP referral to CTR (VA: 168 days; AA: 410 days), shorter time from PCP referral to surgical consultation (VA: 43 days; AA: 191 days), but longer time from surgical consultation to CTR (VA: 98 days; AA: 55 days). Using multivariable models, the VA was associated with a 35% shorter time to CTR (AA hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.82) and 75% shorter time to surgical consultation (AA HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.20-0.03). Receiving both prereferral and postreferral EDS was associated with almost a 2-fold prolonged time to CTR (AA HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The VA was associated with shorter overall time to CTR compared with its AA. However, the VA policy of prioritizing time from referral to surgical consultation may not optimally incentivize time to surgery. Repeat EDS was associated with longer wait times in both systems. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given differences in where delays occur in each health care system, initiatives to improve efficiency will require targeting the appropriate sources of preoperative delay. Judicious use of EDS may be one avenue to decrease wait times in both systems.

The Association Between Electrodiagnostic Severity and Treatment Recommendations for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Our study aimed to evaluate the relationship between electrodiagnostic study (EDS) severity and utilization of treatments for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) as well as the duration of time between EDS and carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical chart review at a single tertiary hand center to evaluate CTS-related care that patients received after EDS. We recorded patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance type, CTS-related surgical and nonsurgical healthcare utilization after EDS testing, and number of days between EDS and CTR. RESULTS: Among all patients with an eventual diagnosis of CTS who received EDS (n = 210), nearly half had normal or mild severity (23%, n = 48; and 28%, n = 58, respectively) and the other half had moderate or severe EDS findings (26%, n = 55; and 23%, n = 49, respectively). Patients with severe findings had the highest rate of receiving surgery (53%) compared with patients with mild and moderate findings (33% vs 46%, respectively). Among the patients who received CTR (n = 73), patients with severe EDS findings had the shortest time to CTR (59.5 days; interquartile range [IQR], 30-81), compared with mild severity (170 days; IQR, 87-415) and moderate severity (77 day; IQR, 42-292). Moderate and severe EDS findings were associated with significantly higher odds of receiving CTR in adjusted analyses (odds ratio, 2.48, 95% confidence interval, 1.04-5.93 and odds ratio 3.79, 95% confidence interval, 1.51-9.50, respectively) compared with patients with mild EDS findings. However, the odds of receiving steroid injection and hand therapy/orthosis were not significantly different based on severity. CONCLUSIONS: Electrodiagnostic study severity had a direct relationship to the probability of receiving surgery but did not correlate with use of nonsurgical treatment. The study findings signal a need to evaluate the value of nonsurgical treatments in patients with severe EDS findings. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

The Increasing Financial Burden of Outpatient Elective Surgery for the Privately Insured.

OBJECTIVE: To examine temporal trends of OOP expenses, total payments, facility fees, and professional fees for outpatient surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Approximately 48 million outpatient surgeries are performed annually with a limited financial understanding of these procedures. High OOP expenses may influence treatment decisions, delay care, and cause financial burden for patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with employer-sponsored insurance undergoing common outpatient surgical procedures (cholecystectomy, cataract surgery, meniscectomy, muscle/tendon procedures, and joint procedures) from 2011 to 2017. Total payments for surgical encounters paid by the insurer/employer and patient OOP expenses were calculated. We used multivariable linear regression to predict total payments and OOP expenses, with costs adjusted to the 2017 US dollar. RESULTS: We evaluated 5,261,295 outpatient surgeries (2011-2017). Total payments increased by 29%, with a 53% increase in facility fees and no change in professional fees. OOP expenses grew by 50%. After controlling for procedure type, procedures performed in ambulatory surgery centers conferred an additional $2019 in predicted total payments (95%CI:$2002-$2036) and $324 in OOP expenses (95%CI:$319-$328) compared to predicted cost for office-based procedures. Hospital-based procedures cost an additional $2649 in predicted total payments (95%CI:$2632-$2667) and $302 in predicted OOP expenses (95%CI:$297-$306) compared to office procedures. CONCLUSION: Increases in outpatient surgery total payments were driven primarily by facility fees and OOP expenses. OOP expenses are rising faster than total payments, highlighting the transition of costs to patients. Healthcare cost reduction policies should consider the largest areas of spending growth such as facility fees and OOP expenses to minimize the financial burden placed on patients.

Patient-Reported Outcomes: Understanding Surgical Efficacy and Quality from the Patient's Perspective.

In surgery, quality assessment encourages improved care delivery, better outcomes, and helps determine surgical efficacy. Quality is important from a patient, provider, payer, and policy maker standpoint. However, given the growth of outpatient procedures, expansion of surgical indications to enhance function, and the decline of perioperative morbidity and mortality, many traditional quality metrics, such as mortality, readmissions, and complications, may not fully capture quality. As such, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can be used to complement the established clinical outcomes and describe surgical efficacy and quality from the patient's point of view. Generic and disease-specific PRO measures capture health-related quality of life, functional status, and pain. These measures permit a more holistic understanding of how surgery affects different aspects of a patient's health, augment other clinical outcomes, and are commonly used to determine efficacy in clinical trials. Moreover, our national reimbursement structure is currently evolving to include PROs for certain surgical conditions in measures of quality and with direct linkage to payments. Even so, there continues to be challenges in the implementation of PRO measures in everyday surgical practice, with questions of optimal administration and how to integrate these measures into provider work flow. Despite these challenges, PROs provide vital information regarding surgical efficacy and quality and are critical in the delivery of patient-centered care.

Inpatient Versus Outpatient Management of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Pediatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is commonly used to manage complex wounds in the pediatric population. With recently developed portable NPWT devices, providers have the opportunity to transition NPWT to the outpatient setting. However, there are no studies describing outpatient NPWT in pediatric patients. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to leverage a population-level analysis to advance our current knowledge about outpatient NPWT use in pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims Database from 2006 to 2014 to identify children treated with NPWT. We compared patient characteristics, indications, complications before and after NPWT, health care utilization within 30 d of NPWT initiation, and health care cost profile of patients treated with NPWT primarily as outpatients versus inpatients. Outpatient NPWT was defined as patients with ≤50% of NPWT coded during an inpatient hospitalization, whereas inpatient NPWT was defined as patients with >50% of NPWT. RESULTS: We identified 3184 patients (1621 inpatients and 1563 outpatients) aged 0-17 y, who were treated with NPWT from 2006 to 2014. Outpatient NPWT was implemented across multiple ages, comorbidities, and indications, with a low complication rate (2.4%). After controlling for hematologic comorbidity and indications, outpatient NPWT was associated with lower risk of complications (odds ratio: 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.86) and lower median total costs ($5602.03) compared with inpatient ($15,233.21) therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient NPWT management in pediatric patients was associated with low complication rates. Additional studies are necessary to determine the most overall cost-effective treatment setting for NPWT in the pediatric population.

Testing proposed quality measures for treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: feasibility, magnitude of quality gaps, and reliability.

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and American Society for Surgery of the Hand recently proposed three quality measures for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS): Measure 1 - Discouraging routine use of Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis of CTS; Measure 2 - Discouraging the use of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release (CTR); and Measure 3 - Discouraging the routine use of occupational and/or physical therapy after CTR. The goal of this study were to 1) Assess the feasibility of using the specifications to calculate the measures in real-world healthcare data and identify aspects of the specifications that might be clarified or improved; 2) Determine if the measures identify important variation in treatment quality that justifies expending resources for their further development and implementation; 3) Assess the facility- and surgeon-level reliability of measures. METHODS: The measures were calculated using national data from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse for three fiscal years (FY; 2016-18). Facility- and surgeon-level performance and reliability were examined. To expand the testing context, the measures were also tested using data from an academic medical center. RESULTS: The denominator of Measure 1 was 132,049 VA patients newly diagnosed with CTS. The denominators of Measures 2 and 3 were 20,813 CTRs received by VA patients. The median facility-level performances on the three measures were 96.5, 100, and 94.7%, respectively. Of 130 VA facilities, none had < 90% performance on Measure 1. Among 111 facilities that performed CTRs, only 1 facility had < 90% performance on Measure 2. In contrast, 21 facilities (18.9%) and 333 surgeons (17.8%) had lower than 90% performance on Measure 3 (Median facility- and surgeon-level reliability for Measure 3 were very high (0.95 and 0.96 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Measure 3 displayed adequate facility- and surgeon-level variability and reliability to justify its use for quality monitoring and improvement purposes. Measures 1 and 2 lacked quality gaps, suggesting they should not be implemented in VA and need to be tested in other healthcare settings. Opportunities exist to refine the specifications of Measure 3 to ensure that different organizations calculate the measure in the same way.

A Survey of Burnout Among Members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand.

PURPOSE: Physician burnout affects approximately half of US physicians, significantly higher than the general working population. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of burnout specifically among hand surgeons and to identify factors unique to the practice of hand surgery that may contribute to burnout. METHODS: A Web-based survey, developed in conjunction with the American Medical Association, was administered to all active and lifetime members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand using the Mini Z Burnout assessment tool. Additional data were collected regarding physician demographics and practice characteristics. RESULTS: The final cohort included 595 US hand surgeons (American Society for Surgery of the Hand [ASSH] members) and demonstrated that 77% of respondents were satisfied with their job, although 49% regarded themselves as having burnout. Lower burnout rates were correlated with physicians aged older than 65, those who practice in an outpatient setting, practice hand surgery only, visit one facility per week, having a lower commute time, those who performed 10 or fewer surgeries per month, and being considered grandfathered for Maintenance of Certification. It was shown that sex, the use of physician extenders, compensation level, and travel club involvement had no impact on burnout rates. CONCLUSIONS: The survey demonstrated that nearly half of US hand surgeons experience burnout even though most are satisfied with their jobs. There is a need to increase awareness and promote targeted interventions to reduce burnout, such as creating a strong team culture, improving resiliency, and enhancing leadership. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Burnout has been shown to affect physicians, their families, patient care, and the health care system as a whole negatively. The findings should promote awareness among hand surgeons and inform future quality improvement efforts targeted at reducing burnout for hand surgeons.

Inappropriate Preoperative Gabapentinoid Use Among Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Gabapentinoids are commonly prescribed for the treatment of neuropathic pain but are not recommended for the primary treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). We sought (1) to investigate the preoperative use of gabapentinoids for the treatment of CTS and (2) to determine whether preoperative exposure is associated with persistent gabapentinoid and opioid use after carpal tunnel release. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using IBM MarketScan Research Databases (2010-2017) of patients who did not fill a gabapentinoid or opioid prescription within 3 months of a new CTS diagnosis undergoing surgical release. Our primary outcomes included preoperative gabapentinoid prescription fills associated with CTS and persistent prescription fills of gabapentinoids and opioids at 91 to 180 days after surgery. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between patient-level factors and persistent gabapentinoid and opioid use. RESULTS: Of the 56,593 patients without a previous gabapentinoid or opioid prescription prior to diagnosis of CTS, 3,474 patients (6%) filled a gabapentinoid prescription before carpal tunnel release. Overall, 835 patients (24% of the preoperative users) continued to fill gabapentinoid prescriptions at 91 to 180 days after surgery. Of the preoperative gabapentinoid users, 20% (702 patients) continued to fill opioid prescriptions at 91 to 80 days after release. After adjusting for patient characteristics, preoperative gabapentinoid use was associated with increased odds of persistent postoperative gabapentinoid use (preoperative gabapentinoid, 22% adjusted probability; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 20.3%-23.0%, no preoperative gabapentinoid use, 1%; 95% CI, 1.2%-1.4%) and persistent postoperative opioid use (preoperative gabapentinoid, 18% adjusted probability; 95% CI, 17%-20%), no preoperative gabapentinoid, 9%; 95% CI, 8.6%-9.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a lack of evidence to support the use of gabapentinoids for CTS, 6% of patients are prescribed a gabapentinoid prior to surgery, and prolonged use is common. Given the effectiveness of surgical release and the risks associated with gabapentinoids, greater attention is needed to ensure that gabapentinoids are prescribed appropriately, avoided when possible, and stopped after surgery. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.