Is Tomorrow's Health Care Today: A Look at Current Payment Models for the Future?

The promise of controlling spending and improving the quality of care incentivizes health care providers to prioritize value through alternative payment models. Findings regarding improved value and cost savings of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) redesign are consistent throughout selected metropolitan hospitals. Before refinement can take place, reporting on baseline financial status is a necessity to ensure the starting point of hospitals before CJR takes effect. Evidence-based protocols, outcomes-based measures to evaluate results, and cooperation across specialties to deliver high quality care will be necessary to insure improved care throughout the episode. This commentary reviews the CJR program and provides recommendations for the near future in order to best serve the needs of patients as we move forward in the bundled payments direction.

A Novel Mobile App-based Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Therapy for the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis: Results From an Extension Study of a Randomized, Double-blind, Sham-controlled, Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mobile app-based neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a promising treatment of knee osteoarthritis as previously demonstrated in a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, multicenter trial (parent study). METHODS: Sixty-four of the 253 patients with knee osteoarthrosis who completed the 12-week parent study were enrolled in a 14-week extension study during which they continued to receive double-blind, home-based NMES (two 20-minute daily sessions, 5 d/wk) with either the original device ("active NMES") or a low-voltage version ("sham NMES"). All subjects who enrolled in the extension study comprised the intent-to-treat population and subjects who applied NMES (compliance monitored through the mobile app and a remote portal) for at least 2,800 minutes (14-week device usage) comprised the per-protocol therapy compliant population. RESULTS: In the per-protocol therapy compliant population, the active NMES group (n = 21) had a higher reduction in Visual Analog Scale Nominated Activity (64.7% versus 24.3%, P = 0.020) and Visual Analog Scale Nominated Activity improvement ≥50% (76.2% versus 12.5%, P = 0.002) than the sham NMES group (n = 8). Outcomes were not markedly different between groups in the intent-to-treat population. DISCUSSION: Applying NMES therapy for an additional 14 weeks (totaling 26 weeks) resulted in notable and clinically meaningful pain relief when patients were fully compliant with NMES.

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: An Updated Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Use of "orthobiologics" continues to expand for patients who have knee osteoarthritis (OA). We sought to perform a systemic review of biologic therapies relative to comparative groups, including the following: (1) platelet-rich plasma (PRP); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amniotic-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs). We assessed the following: (1) study methodologies; (2) cell preparations and formulations; (3) patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs); and (4) structural changes. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were queried (2013-2021) to conduct a systematic review of biologic therapies for knee OA, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eighty-two studies were included: PRP (51); BMSC (15); ADSC (11); and AMSC (5). Study evaluations were made using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. PROMs included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and the Visual Analog Scale. Structural change evaluations included ultrasounds, radiographs, or magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: PRP comprised a majority of the studies (n = 51), most with "fair" to "good" Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Studies had variable cell preparations and formulations, with comparison study results leading to inconsistent PROMs, and structural changes. A limited number of studies were included for BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC, all with similar findings to PRP. CONCLUSION: Available literature evaluating "orthobiologics" for knee OA remain nonsuperior to comparison cohorts. Higher level studies with larger sample sizes and improved methodologies are warranted to suggest differences. Despite a growth of "orthobiologics" in clinics, this updated systematic review highlights the uncertain efficacy for use in knee OA.

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The use of biologic therapies for the management of knee osteoarthritis has increased, despite insufficient evidence of efficacy. Our aim was to complete a systematic review and analysis of reports utilizing the highest level-of-evidence evaluating: (1) platelet-rich plasma injections (PRPs); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amnion-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies evaluating PRP injections, BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Of 1009 studies identified within the last 5 years, 123 met inclusion criteria. A comprehensive analysis of all levels-of-evidence was performed, as well as separate analysis on level-of-evidence I studies. Level-of-evidence was determined by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons classification system. RESULTS: Although the majority of PRP reports demonstrated improvements in pain and/or function, others revealed no substantial improvements. Similar findings were noted for BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs. Assessments of BMSC studies yielded majority with positive clinical results, although short-lived. Studies on ADSCs revealed improved clinical outcomes, but equivocal radiographic outcomes. Studies evaluating AMSCs demonstrated improvements in pain and function, and decreased radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: Despite some promising early results for PRP, BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC therapies, the majority of level-of-evidence I studies have multiple problems: small sample sizes, potentially inappropriate control cohorts, short-term follow-up, and so on. Despite the limitations, there still appears to be evidence justifying their use for knee osteoarthritis management. More high-level, larger human studies utilizing standardized protocols are needed.

Use of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation During Physical Therapy May Reduce the Incidence of Arthrofibrosis After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Arthrofibrosis remains a major complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) that negatively impacts patient outcomes and exhausts healthcare resources. The use of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) has demonstrated the ability to facilitate quadriceps muscle recovery and reduce pain. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare TKA patients who received physical therapy (PT) and adjuvant NMES therapy versus physical therapy alone in terms of: 1) rates of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) to treat arthrofibrosis; and 2) post-therapy range of motion (ROM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective review of TKA patients from multiple institutions who underwent physical therapy versus physical therapy and adjuvant NMES therapy following primary TKA. A total of 206 patients were reviewed in the two cohorts that either received PT alone (n=86) or PT and adjuvant NMES therapy (n=120). Data regarding the requirement of MUA postoperatively for treatment of arthrofibrosis were collected for every patient. Additionally, pre- and post-therapy knee ROM data was also collected. Outcomes in both cohorts were then compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Lower rates of arthrofibrosis requiring MUA were recorded in patients who used NMES therapy and PT when compared to PT alone (7.5% vs. 19.8%; p=0.009). Log regression analysis revealed lower odds of needing MUA in patients who utilized NMES therapy in adjunct with PT (odds ratio [OR]=0.36; 95% CI: 0.115 to 0.875; p=0.023). Patients who received the NMES therapy were shown to have a statistically greater mean improvement in ROM when compared to those patients who did not receive NMES (+2.63, p=0.04). Log regression analysis also demonstrated that post-PT ROM decreased the odds of receiving MUA with a larger ROM (OR=92; 95% CI: 0.824 to 0.9855; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the use of NMES during PT may reduce the incidence of arthrofibrosis and improve patient ROM. Prospective, randomized controlled, and larger-scale studies are needed to validate these results. Nevertheless, this novel report demonstrated the positive outcomes for a new application of the NMES therapy.

What Is the Efficacy of Repeat Manipulations Under Anesthesia to Treat Stiffness Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) can help post-total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who have knee stiffness regain range-of-motion. However, despite undergoing MUA, patients may have persistent knee stiffness. Often, this persistent knee stiffness is treated with a repeat MUA. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate repeat MUAs by assessing: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) range-of-motion, (3) clinical outcomes, and (4) rate of revision surgery in post-TKA patients with persistent knee stiffness who either underwent a single MUA or repeat MUAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred-and-sixty-seven post-TKA who had undergone an MUA between 2005 and 2011 at two institutions were reviewed. Patients were stratified into those who had a single-MUA (138 knees) and those who had a repeat MUA (29 knees). The mean follow-up period was 63 months (range, 36 to 90 months). The incidence of repeat MUA within this cohort was determined. Demographics and ROM were compared using Student t-test and Chi-square as appropriate. Functional outcomes were assessed using Knee Society scores (KSS) and compared between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Among the 167 patients who underwent a MUA, 29 (17%) required repeat manipulations. The repeat MUA cohort was younger and more likely to have osteonecrosis as the underlying cause of knee disease. For the repeat MUA cohort, 17 patients (59%) had achieved satisfactory mean gains in ROM after their repeat MUAs. These patients had also achieved excellent mean Knee Society objective and functional scores. However, another seven knees (24%) had further persistent knee stiffness requiring arthrolysis of adhesions and five patients (17%) had undergone revision of the polyethylene spacer or patellar component to improve range-of-motion. CONCLUSION: In this study, the majority of patients who had undergone a repeat MUA were able to achieve improvements in flexion range-of-motion and functional outcomes. However, the remaining patients required more invasive procedure to treat persistent knee stiffness. In patients who have persistent knee stiffness after MUAs, a repeat MUA may be helpful to increase range-of-motion and function.

Total hip arthroplasty: comparison of two-incision and standard techniques at an AOA-accredited community hospital.

CONTEXT: The two-incision approach to total hip arthroplasty (THA) has received increasing attention in recent years. However, the benefits of this procedure have been debated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the two-incision THA technique compared to the standard anterolateral THA approach in a community hospital setting. METHODS: A retrospective review of records from patients who had THA at Memorial Hospital of York in Pennsylvania. Outcomes for patients who received the two-incision THA technique were compared to those who had a standard anterolateral THA approach. Perioperative parameters included operation duration and complication rates. Early function was evaluated by hospital length of stay and whether patients were discharged home or to a rehabilitation center. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients had 30 THAs with a two-incision technique, and 30 patients had a standard anterolateral THA. Demographic parameters were similar among both groups. The two-incision THA group had a longer mean operation time by 34 minutes but shorter hospital stay by 0.8 days. Patients in the two-incision THA group were discharged to home 87% of the time compared to 43% in the anterolateral group. In addition, 4 patients (13%) in the two-incision group had an orthopedic complication compared to no complications in the anterolateral group. CONCLUSION: There were longer operative times, shorter hospital stays, and higher complication rates among patients who received the two-incision THA. Patients who receive the two-incision THA should be selected carefully and advised about the potential for increased complications.

New treatment approaches for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: an overview.

Osteonecrosis of the femoral head is a debilitating disease that ultimately leads to hip joint destruction. Various efforts have been made in an attempt to enhance the healing of osseous defects in the femoral head before collapse occurs. Examples of noninvasive treatment modalities include pharmacologic measures, electrical stimulation, shock wave therapy, and electromagnetic field therapy. In addition, biologic alternatives will induce new bone formation. Many of these agents or techniques are still undergoing preclinical and clinical trials, and some are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. It is important to review new treatment opportunities that are currently available or on the horizon.