The value of the modern vascular surgeon to the health care system: A report from the Society for Vascular Surgery Valuation Work Group.

Vascular surgeons provide an important service to the health care system. They are capable of treating a wide range of disease processes that affect both the venous and arterial systems. Their presence broadens the complexity and diversity of services that a health care system can offer both in the outpatient setting and in the inpatient setting. Because of their ability to control hemorrhage, they are critical to a safe operating room environment. The vascular surgery service line has a positive impact on hospital margin through both the direct vascular profit and loss and the indirect result of assisting other surgical and medical services in providing care. The financial benefits of a vascular service line will hold true for a wide range of alternative payment models, such as bundled payments or capitation. To fully leverage a modern vascular surgeon's skill set, significant investment is required from the health care system that is, however, associated with substantial return on the investment.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Alternative Payment Model Task Force report on opportunities for value-based reimbursement in care for patients with peripheral artery disease.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Alternative Payment Model (APM) Taskforce document explores the drivers and implications for developing objective value-based reimbursement plans for the care of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The APM is a payment approach that highlights high-quality and cost-efficient care and is a financially incentivized pathway for participation in the Quality Payment Program, which aims to replace the traditional fee-for-service payment method. At present, the participation of vascular specialists in APMs is hampered owing to the absence of dedicated models. The increasing prevalence of PAD diagnosis, technological advances in therapeutic devices, and the increasing cost of care of the affected patients have financial consequences on care delivery models and population health. The document summarizes the existing measurement methods of cost, care processes, and outcomes using payor data, patient-reported outcomes, and registry participation. The document also evaluates the existing challenges in the evaluation of PAD care, including intervention overuse, treatment disparities, varied clinical presentations, and the effects of multiple comorbid conditions on the cost potentially attributable to the vascular interventionalist. Medicare reimbursement data analysis also confirmed the prolonged need for additional healthcare services after vascular interventions. The Society for Vascular Surgery proposes that a PAD APM should provide patients with comprehensive care using a longitudinal approach with integration of multiple key medical and surgical services. It should maintain appropriate access to diagnostic and therapeutic advancements and eliminate unnecessary interventions. It should also decrease the variability in care but must also consider the varying complexity of the presenting PAD conditions. Enhanced quality of care and physician innovation should be rewarded. In addition, provisions should be present within an APM for high-risk patients who carry the risk of exclusion from care because of the naturally associated high costs. Although the document demonstrates clear opportunities for quality improvement and cost savings in PAD care, continued PAD APM development requires the assessment of more granular data for accurate risk adjustment, in addition to largescale testing before public release. Collaboration between payors and physician specialty societies remains key.

Analysis of Outpatient Telemedicine Reimbursement in an Integrated Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Current reimbursement policy surrounding telemedicine has been cited as a barrier for the adaptation of this care model. The objective of this study is to analyze the reimbursement figures for outpatient telemedicine consultation in vascular surgery. METHODS: Patients first underwent synchronous telemedicine visits after receiving point-of-care ultrasound at one of 3 satellite locations of Henry Ford Health System in Michigan. Visit types included new, return, and postoperative patients. Reimbursement information related to payor, adjustment, denial, paid and outstanding balances were recorded for each telemedicine visit. Then, using an enterprise data warehouse, a retrospective analysis was performed for the aforementioned telemedicine visits. The data were analyzed to determine the outcome of total billed charges, number of denied claims, reimbursement per payor, reimbursement per patient, and out-of-pocket costs to the patients. RESULTS: Among 184 virtual clinical encounters, the payors included Aetna US Healthcare, Blue Advantage, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cofinity Plan, Health Alliance Plan, HAP Medicare Advantage, Humana Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, Medicare, Molina Medicaid HMO, United Healthcare, Blue Care Network, Aetna Better Health of Michigan, Priority Health, and self-pay. Among the 15 payors, reimbursement ranged from 0% to 67% of the total charges billed. Among the 184 virtual visits, a grand total of $22,145 was collected or an average of $120.35 per virtual encounter. The breakdown of charges billed was 40% adjusted, 41% paid by insurance, 10% paid by patient, and 13% denied. There were 27 total denials (15%). Denial of payment included telehealth and nontelehealth reasons, citing noncovered charges, payment included for other prior services, new patient quality not met, and not covered by payor. The average out-of-pocket cost to patients was $12.59 per visit. CONCLUSIONS: These reimbursement data validate the economic potential within this new platform of healthcare delivery. As our experience with the business model grows, we expect to see an increase in reimbursement from private payors and acceptance from patients. Within a tertiary care system, telemedicine for chronic vascular disease has proven to be a viable means to reach a broader population base, and without significant cost to the patients.

Cost-effectiveness of the treatments for critical limb ischemia in the elderly population.

OBJECTIVE: The treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI), with the intention to prevent limb loss, is often an intensive and expensive therapy. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of endovascular and conservative treatment of elderly CLI patients unsuitable for surgery. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, data were gathered in two Dutch peripheral hospitals. CLI patients aged 70 years or older were included in the outpatient clinic. Exclusion criteria were malignant disease, lack of language skills, and cognitive impairment; 195 patients were included and 192 patients were excluded. After a multidisciplinary vascular conference, patients were divided into three treatment groups (endovascular revascularization, surgical revascularization, or conservative therapy). Subanalyses based on age were made (70-79 years and ≥80 years). The follow-up period was 2 years. Cost-effectiveness of endovascular and conservative treatment was quantified using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in euros per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: At baseline, patients allocated to surgical revascularization had better health states, but the health states of endovascular revascularization and conservative therapy patients were comparable. With an ICER of €38,247.41/QALY (∼$50,869/QALY), endovascular revascularization was cost-effective compared with conservative therapy. This is favorable compared with the Dutch applicable threshold of €80,000/QALY (∼$106,400/QALY). The subanalyses also established that endovascular revascularization is a cost-effective alternative for conservative treatment both in patients aged 70 to 79 years (ICER €29,898.36/QALY; ∼$39,765/QALY) and in octogenarians (ICER €56,810.14/QALY; ∼$75,557/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown that endovascular revascularization is cost-effective compared with conservative treatment of CLI patients older than 70 years and also in octogenarians. Given the small absolute differences in costs and effects, physicians should also consider individual circumstances that can alter the outcome of the intervention. Cost-effectiveness remains one of the aspects to take into consideration in making a clinical decision.

Partnerships between podiatrists and vascular surgeons in building effective wound care centers.

This practice memo, a collaborative effort between the Young Physicians' Program of the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Young Surgeons Committee of the Society for Vascular Surgery, is intended to aid podiatrists and vascular surgeons in the early years of their respective careers, especially those involved in the care of patients with chronic wounds. During these formative years, learning how to successfully establish an interprofessional partnership is crucial to provide the best possible care to this important population of patients.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Initial Treatment Strategies for Nonembolic Acute Limb Ischemia Using Real-Word Data.

BACKGROUND: Nonembolic acute limb ischemia (ALI) is a condition characterized by a sudden decrease in limb perfusion and requires immediate interventions. There are multiple treatment options available including surgery, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), endovascular procedures, and hybrid treatment (a combination of open and endovascular techniques). Randomized trials provide information only on clinical efficacy, but not on economic outcomes. The objective of the study was to perform the cost-effective analysis comparing different treatment alternatives of ALI. METHODS: The data were collected from 4r ProMedica community hospitals in the Northwest Ohio from January 2009 to December 2012. Patients were included if they were treated within 14 days of onset of symptoms for nonembolic ALI and were divided into groups of receiving CDT, surgery, endovascular, or hybrid treatments. Demographics, comorbidities, medications taken before admission, and smoking status were collected at baseline for all patients and were compared among the treatment groups. A cost-effectiveness decision tree was developed to calculate expected costs and life years gained associated with available treatment options. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also performed to check the robustness of the model. RESULTS: A population of 205 patients with the diagnosis of ALI was included and divided into different treatment groups. There was no major significant difference in baseline characteristics among the studied groups (P > 0.05). The total costs were $17,163.47 for surgery, $20,620.39 for endovascular, $21,277.61 for hybrid, and $30,675.42 for CDT. The life years gained were 17.25 for surgery, 18 for endovascular, 18 for hybrid, and 17 for CDT. CDT was dominated because of the high cost and the low effectiveness, while hybrid treatment was dominated when compared with endovascular treatment because these 2 treatments have similar outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the endovascular group over the surgery group was found to be $4,609.23 per life year gained. The sensitivity analysis showed that the endovascular treatment was found to be cost-effective under willingness to pay $50,000. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides economic evaluation of ALI treatments for a defined clinical population in the real-world setting. Compared with other available alternatives, the endovascular treatment showed to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources.

Systematic identification and management of barriers to vascular surgery patient discharge time of day.

OBJECTIVE: Length of stay fails to completely capture the clinical and economic effects of patient progression through the phases of inpatient care, such as admission, room placement, procedures, and discharge. Delayed hospital throughput has been linked to increased time spent in the emergency department and postanesthesia care unit, delayed time to treatment, increased in-hospital mortality, decreased patient satisfaction, and lost hospital revenue. We identified barriers to vascular surgery inpatient care progression and instituted defined measures to positively impact standardized metrics. METHODS: The study was divided into three periods: preintervention, "wash-in," and postintervention. During the preintervention phase, barriers to patient flow were quantified by an interdisciplinary team. Suboptimal provider communication emerged as the key barrier. An enhanced communication intervention consisting of face-to-face and mobile application-based education on key patient flow metrics, explicit discussion of individual patient barriers to progression at rounds and interdisciplinary huddles, and communication of projected discharge and potential barriers via e-mail was developed with input from all stakeholders. Following a 4-week wash-in implementation phase, data collection was repeated. RESULTS: The pre- and postintervention patient cohorts accounted for 244.3 and 238.1 inpatient days, respectively. Both groups had similar baseline demographic, clinical characteristics, and procedures performed during hospitalization. The postintervention group was discharged 78 minutes earlier (14:00:32 vs 15:18:37; P = .03) with a trend toward increased discharge by noon (94% vs 88%; P = .09). Readmission rates did not differ (P = .44). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a focused, interdisciplinary, frontline provider-driven, enhanced communication program can be feasibly incorporated into existing specialty surgical workflow. The program resulted in improved timeliness of discharge and projected cost savings, without increasing readmission rates.

Vascular surgeon-hospitalist comanagement improves in-hospital mortality at the expense of increased in-hospital cost.

OBJECTIVE: We have shown that vascular surgeon- hospitalist co management resulted in improved in-hospital mortality rates. We now aim to assess the impact of the hospitalist co management service (HCS) on healthcare cost. METHODS: A total of 1558 patients were divided into three cohorts and compared: 516 in 2012, 525 in 2013, and 517 in 2014. The HCS began in January 2013. Data were standardized for six vascular surgeons that were present 2012-2014. New attendings were excluded. Ten hospitalists participated. Case mix index (CMI), contribution margin, total hospital charges (THCs), length of stay (LOS), actual direct costs (ADCs), and actual variable indirect costs (AVICs) were compared. Analysis of variance with post-hoc tests, t-tests, and linear regressions were performed. RESULTS: THC rose by a mean difference of $14,578.31 between 2012 and 2014 (P < .001) with a significant difference found between all groups during the study period (P = .0004). ADC increased more than AVIC; however, both significantly increased over time (P = .0002 and P = .014, respectively). A mean $3326.63 increase in ADC was observed from 2012 to 2014 (P < .0001). AVIC only increased by an average $392.86 during the study period (P = .01). This increased cost was observed in the context of a higher CMI and longer LOS. CMI increased from 2.25 in 2012 to 2.53 in 2014 (P = .006). LOS increased by a mean 1.02 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .016), and significantly during the study period overall (P = .018). After adjusting for CMI, LOS increases by only 0.61 days between 2012 and 2014 (P = .07). In a final regression model, THC is independently predicted by comanagement, CMI, and LOS. After adjusting for CMI and LOS, the increase in THC because of comanagement (2012 vs 2014) accounts for only $4073.08 of the total increase (P < .001). During this time, 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼7% (P = .005), while related 30-day readmission rates decreased by ∼2% (P = .32). Physician contribution margin remained unchanged over the 3-year period (P = .76). The most prevalent diagnosis-related group was consistent across all years. Variation in the principal diagnosis code was observed with the prevalence of circulatory disorders because of type II diabetes replacing atherosclerosis with gangrene as the most prevalent diagnosis in 2013 and 2014 compared with 2012. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital cost is significantly higher since the start of the HCS. This surge may relate to increased CMI, LOS, and improved coding. This increase in cost may be justified as we have observed sustained reduction in in-hospital mortality and slightly improved readmission rates.

The influence of a Vascular Surgery Hospitalist program on physician and patient satisfaction, resident education, and resource utilization.

A number of surgery practice models have been developed to address general and trauma surgeon workforce shortages and on-call issues and to improve surgeon satisfaction. These include the creation of acute or urgent care surgery services and "surgical hospitalist" programs. To date, no practice models corresponding to those developed for general and trauma surgeons have been proposed to address these same issues among vascular surgeons or other surgical subspecialists. In 2003, our practice established a Vascular Surgery Hospitalist program. Since its inception nearly a decade ago, it has undergone several modifications. We reviewed hospital administrative databases and surveys of faculty, residents, and patients to evaluate the program's impact. Benefits of the Vascular Surgery Hospitalist program include improved surgeon satisfaction, resource utilization, timeliness of patient care, communication among referring physicians and ancillary staff, and resident teaching/supervision. Elements of this program may be applicable to a variety of surgical subspecialty settings.

What is the present situation of vascular surgery? Considerations and reflections based on real practice.

"For the best vascular care to every patient, every day" is the goal of our practice, but is it a possible goal? Where are we now? The general idea is that we are pursuing the right way. The evolution of our discipline in the last two decades has been extraordinary and we reaffirm that we are the leaders in diagnose and treatment of the arterial pathology. Unfortunately, we can find some cases in which reality has to be faced as hardly as it can be, remembering us that we still have to go further with our job. The delay in the diagnose and treatment could lead to a permanent deficit and a money loss for the national health system due to prolonged hospitalization, multiple re-hospitalizations, loss of working capacity. This must be avoided. We strongly suggest that a vascular surgeon should be present in all the Emergency Room and should be routinely involved in the management of patients. The routine use of dedicated interdisciplinary protocols should be strongly advocated. Vascular surgery, as medical specialty, should be recognized as single specialty in all countries and as "peculiar" by the National Authority as well as Neurosurgery and Cardiac Surgery.

Application of Porter's Five Forces Model and generic strategies for vascular surgery: should be stuck in the middle?

There are many stakeholders in the vascular marketplace from clinicians to hospitals, third party payers, medical device manufacturers and the government. Economic stress, threats of policy reform and changing health-care delivery are adding to the challenges faced by vascular surgeons. Use of Porter's Five Forces analysis to identify the sources of competition, the strength and likelihood of that competition existing, and barriers to competition that affect vascular surgery will help our specialty understand both the strength of our current competition and the strength of a position that our specialty will need to move to. By understanding the nature of the Porter's Five Forces as it applies to vascular surgery, and by appreciating their relative importance, our society would be in a stronger position to defend itself against threats and perhaps influence the forces with a long-term strategy. Porter's generic strategies attempt to create effective links for business with customers and suppliers and create barriers to new entrants and substitute products. It brings an initial perspective that is convenient to adapt to vascular surgery in order to reveal opportunities.Vascular surgery is uniquely situated to pursue both a differentiation and high value leadership strategy.

Readmissions of patients with diabetes mellitus and foot ulcers after infra-popliteal bypass surgery - attacking the problem by an integrated case management model.

BACKGROUND: Patients with neuroischemic diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) may need arterial revascularization, minor amputations, débridements as well as meticulous wound care. Unfortunately, postoperative outpatient care is frequently inadequate. This is especially true for Germany, where the in- and outpatient sectors are funded and managed separately, with poor communication between the two. Thus, many patients may be readmitted to the hospital following successful treatment and discharge. In an attempt to overcome these problems, we looked at whether an integrated case management (CM) system for outpatient care according to in-hospital standards might improve patients care and avoid readmissions. In addition we analyzed the length of hospital stay (LOS) as well as hospital costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study patients with DFS, bypass surgery and foot surgery after implementation of the CM (study group; n = 376) were compared with a matched historic control group (HCG; n = 190) including the flat rate revenues (G-DRG K01B). Following a standardized assessment, integrated trans-sectoral CM care was offered to 116 patients (CMP). RESULTS: The proportion of patients who were readmitted to hospital was reduced in CMP compared to HCG (8.8 vs. 16.4 %; p < 0.01), with consequent reduction of case consolidations (9.7 % versus 17.8 %, p < 0.001). Although initially, the mean LOS was higher in the CMP patients, the reduction in readmissions meant that this integrated CM program improved the hospital's economic situation. CONCLUSIONS: A hospital-based integrated CM system significantly reduces the hospital readmissions in patients with neuroischemic DFS following bypass surgery, with lower hospital costs.

An all-inclusive and transparent view of a vascular program's direct impact on its health system.

OBJECTIVE: This study explores the fiduciary advantage of a Vascular Surgery program to an academic, tertiary care hospital. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of hospital (HealthQuest) and physician (IDX) billing databases from April 2009 to September 2010. We identified all patients interacting with Vascular Surgery (VS) to provide an overview of global finances. Patients introduced solely by VS were identified to minimize confounding of the downstream effect. Outcome measures obtained were revenue, average and total gross margin, relative value unit production, and service utilization. RESULTS: A total of 552 cases were identified demonstrating $13 million in revenue. This translated into a gross margin of $5 million. Examined per surgeon, VS was the most profitable, producing $1.6 million. Lower extremity amputation had the highest average gross margin at $34,000. Notably, $8 million in direct cost is among the highest in the health system. A total of 137 cases unique to VS generated $5 million in total revenue. This patient subset made use of up to 29 physician specialty services. General Medicine and Radiology were the most frequently utilized. CONCLUSION: The overall profitability of a comprehensive vascular program is tremendously positive. This study verifies that new vascular-specific referrals are a significant catalyst for revenue.

Evaluation of the pain in varicose vein surgery under tumescent local anaesthesia using sodium bicarbonate as excipient without any intravenous sedation.

OBJECTIVE: In order to simplify varicose vein surgery, we studied the possibility of tumescent local anaesthesia (TLA) using sodium bicarbonate 1.4% as excipient without any intravenous sedation. METHODS: For three months, 215 patients were included in two centres for ambulatory varicose vein surgery performed without any intravenous sedation. Clinical results and pain were evaluated according to the type and duration of surgery. RESULTS: Mean perioperative pain was evaluated at 2.7 on a visual scale (0-10). In 91% of the cases, surgery was deemed to be slightly painful. Preoperative pain was not linked to the technical means of surgery but to the psychological and organizational environment of the centre. CONCLUSIONS: In many of the cases, varicose vein surgery could be performed under TLA without any intravenous sedation. Ambulatory varicose vein surgery without any intravenous sedation could be highly cost-effective.

Endovenous treatments for varicose veins--over-taking or over-rated?

OBJECTIVES: A variety of endovenous therapies for the treatment of superficial venous incompetence are currently available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of endovenous techniques used by consultant vascular surgeons in the United Kingdom. METHODS: An anonymous online survey of 16 multiple choice questions relating to the nature and provision of treatment for varicose veins was devised. Consultant members of the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland were invited to participate by email. RESULTS: A total of 108/352 (31%) surgeons completed the survey. The majority offered surgery as the first-line treatment for primary great saphenous vein (GSV) and small saphenous vein (SSV) incompetence (69% and 74%, respectively). Endovenous procedures were offered as first-line treatment by 32/108 (29.6%) for GSV reflux, 36/51 (70.6%) surgeons performed these under local anaesthetic and 21/51 (41.2%) were performed as an outpatient procedure. The most important factor influencing treatment decisions was considered to be patient preference by 77/108 (71.3%) surgeons, although 48/61 (78.7%) respondents were restricted by primary care trusts with regard to endovenous treatments, and 33/108 (30.6%) offered different treatments to private patients. CONCLUSION: Traditional surgery remains the most commonly offered treatment for patients with varicose veins. The provision of endovenous therapies varies greatly, and there are significant differences in local availability regarding these treatments.

Endovenous laser treatment for uncomplicated varicose veins.

OBJECTIVE: Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) of incompetent truncal veins has been proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional surgery for varicose veins. Various strategies have been proposed for successful treatment and this study reviews the evidence for these. METHOD: A Medline and 'controlled trials online database' search was performed to identify original articles and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting outcomes for EVLA. Information on patient selection, equipment, technique and outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Ninety-eight original studies, including five RCTs, were identified. RCT data indicate short-term outcomes (abolition of reflux, improvement in quality of life [QOL], patient satisfaction) were equivalent to those for surgery. Long-term follow-up is not available. A further RCT showed superior outcomes for ablation commencing at the lowest point of superficial venous reflux rather than at an arbitrary point (fewer residual varicosities, greater improvement in QOL). Non-randomized series suggest that laser energy of >60 J/cm results in reliable truncal vein occlusion and that longer wavelength lasers may be associated with less post-treatment discomfort. CONCLUSION: In the short-term EVLA is a safe and effective treatment for patients with varicose veins. Long-term follow-up is still required.

Ambulatory phlebectomy in the office.

Ambulatory phlebectomy is a minor, office-based surgical procedure designed to remove varicose veins. It is a perfect complement to endovenous thermal ablation of the saphenous vein. With this combination, patients can expect all varicose veins to vanish following a 1-hour procedure that employs only local anesthesia in the comfort of a physician's office. Advantages of office-based surgery are ease of scheduling for doctors and patients, less paperwork, elimination of travel time, and cost containment for the health care system. Furthermore, a procedure that is performed by the same staff daily is more streamlined and safe.

Treatment pathways, resource use, and costs of endovascular coiling versus surgical clipping after aSAH.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) reported that endovascular coiling yields better clinical outcomes than surgical clipping at 1 year. The high cost of the consumables associated with the endovascular coiling procedure (particularly the coils) led health care purchasers to conclude that coiling was a more costly procedure overall. To examine this assumption and provide evidence for future policy, accurate and comprehensive data are required on the overall resource usage and cost of each strategy. METHODS: We provide detailed results of patient treatment pathways, resource utilization, and costs up to 24 months postrandomization for endovascular and neurosurgical treatment of aSAH. We report data on costs related to initial and subsequent procedures (ward days, ITU, equipment, staff, consumables, etc), adverse events, complications, and follow up. The data are based on a subsample of all patients randomized in ISAT, containing all patients across 22 UK centers (n=1644). RESULTS: There was a nonsignificant difference - pound 1740 (- pound 3582 to pound 32) in the total 12-month cost of treatment in favor of endovascular treatment. Endovascular patients had higher costs than neurosurgical patients for the initial procedure, for the number and length of stay of subsequent procedures, and for follow-up angiograms. These were more than offset by lower costs related to length of stay for the initial procedure. In the following 12- to 24-month period, costs for subsequent procedures, angiograms, complications, and adverse events were greater for the endovascular patients, reducing the difference in total per patient cost to - pound 1228 (- pound 3199 to pound 786) over the first 24 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in costs between the endovascular and neurosurgery groups existed at 12- or 24-month follow up.