Patient selection in the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model.

OBJECTIVE: To understand whether the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program induces participating hospitals to (1) preferentially select lower risk patients, (2) reduce 90-day episode-of-care costs, (3) improve quality of care, and (4) achieve greater cost reduction during its second year, when downside financial risk was applied. DATA SOURCES: We identified beneficiaries of age 65 years or older undergoing hip or knee joint replacement in the 100% sample of Medicare fee-for-service inpatient (Part A) claims from January 1, 2013 to August 31, 2017. Cases were linked to subsequent outpatient, Part B, home health agency, and skilled nursing facility claims, as well as publicly available participation status for CJR. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated the effect of CJR for hospitals in the 67 metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) selected to participate in CJR (785 hospitals), compared to those in 104 non-CJR MSAs (962 hospitals; maintaining fee-for-service). A difference-in-differences approach was used to detect patient selection, as well as to compare 90-day episode-of-care costs and quality of care between CJR and non-CJR hospitals over the first two performance years. DATA COLLECTION: We excluded 172 hospitals from our analysis due to their preexisting BPCI participation. We focused on elective admissions in the main analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: While reductions in 90-day episode-of-care costs were greater among CJR hospitals (-$902, 95% CI: -$1305, -$499), largely driven by a 16.8% (p < 0.01) decline in 90-day spending in skilled nursing facilities, CJR hospitals significantly reduced the 90-day readmission rate (-3.9%; p < 0.05) and preferentially avoided patients aged 85 years or older (-5.9%; p < 0.01) and Black (-7.0%; p < 0.01). Cost reduction was greater in 2017 than in 2016, corresponding to the start of downside risk. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in CJR was associated with a modest cost reduction and a reduction in 90-day readmission rates; however, we also observed evidence of preferential avoidance of older patients perceived as being higher risk among CJR hospitals.

Association of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model With Disparities in the Use of Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement.

Importance: The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model is Medicare's mandatory bundled payment reform to improve quality and spending for beneficiaries who need total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR), yet it does not account for sociodemographic risk factors such as race/ethnicity and income. Results of this study could be the basis for a Medicare payment reform that addresses inequities in joint replacement care. Objective: To examine the association of the CJR model with racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in the use of elective THR and TKR among older Medicare beneficiaries after accounting for the population of patients who were at risk or eligible for these surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the 2013 to 2017 national Medicare data and multivariable logistic regressions with triple-differences estimation. Medicare beneficiaries who were aged 65 to 99 years, entitled to Medicare, alive at the end of the calendar year, and residing either in the 67 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) mandated to participate in the CJR model or in the 104 control MSAs were identified. A subset of Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of arthritis underwent THR or TKR. Data were analyzed from March to December 2020. Exposures: Implementation of the CJR model in 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were separate binary indicators for whether a beneficiary underwent THR or TKR. Key independent variables were MSA treatment status, pre- or post-CJR model implementation phase, combination of race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic beneficiaries) and dual eligibility, and their interactions. Logistic regression models were used to control for patient characteristics, MSA fixed effects, and time trends. Results: The 2013 cohort included 4 447 205 Medicare beneficiaries, of which 2 025 357 (45.5%) resided in MSAs with the CJR model. The cohort's mean (SD) age was 77.18 (7.95) years, and it was composed of 2 951 140 female (66.4%), 3 928 432 non-Hispanic White (88.3%), and 657 073 dually eligible (14.8%) beneficiaries. Before the CJR model implementation, rates were highest among non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries at 1.25% (95% CI, 1.24%-1.26%) for THR use and 2.28% (95% CI, 2.26%-2.29%) for TKR use in MSAs with CJR model. Compared with MSAs without the CJR model and the analogous race/ethnicity and dual-eligibility group, the CJR model was associated with a 0.10 (95% CI, 0.05-0.15; P < .001) percentage-point increase in TKR use for non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries, a 0.11 (95% CI, 0.004-0.21; P = .04) percentage-point increase for non-Hispanic White dual-eligible beneficiaries, a 0.15 (95% CI, -0.29 to -0.01; P = .04) percentage-point decrease for non-Hispanic Black non-dual-eligible beneficiaries, and a 0.18 (95% CI, -0.34 to -0.01; P = .03) percentage-point decrease for non-Hispanic Black dual-eligible beneficiaries. These CJR model-associated changes in TKR use were 0.25 (95% CI, -0.40 to -0.10; P = .001) percentage points lower for non-Hispanic Black non-dual-eligible beneficiaries and 0.27 (95% CI, -0.45 to -0.10; P = .002) percentage points lower for non-Hispanic Black dual-eligible beneficiaries compared with the model-associated changes for non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries. No association was found between the CJR model and a widening of the THR use gap among race/ethnicity and dual eligibility groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicate that the CJR model was associated with a modest increase in the already substantial difference in TKR use among non-Hispanic Black vs non-Hispanic White beneficiaries; no difference was found for THR. These findings support the widespread concern that payment reform has the potential to exacerbate disparities in access to joint replacement care.

Association of Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment Program With the Receipt of Elective Hip and Knee Replacement in White, Black, and Hispanic Beneficiaries.

Importance: The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model was designed to reduce the cost and improve the quality of hip or knee replacement among Medicare beneficiaries. Yet whether this model may exacerbate existing racial/ethnic disparities in access to the surgery is unclear. Objective: To examine the association of the CJR model with the receipt of elective hip or knee replacement across White, Black, and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare claims from 2013 through 2017 among White, Black, and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective joint replacement in 65 treatment (selected for CJR participation) and 101 control metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). Exposures: Starting in April 2016, hospitals in the treatment MSAs were required to participate in the CJR model and were accountable for expenditures occurring during patients' hospitalization for hip or knee replacement and 90 days after the hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: Beneficiary-level elective hip or knee replacement receipt in a given year. Results: Among 17 243 304 patients, 9 839 996 (57%) were women; 2 107 425 (12%) were age 85 years or older. Of the final sample, 14 632 434 (85%) were White beneficiaries, 1 518 629 (9%) were Black beneficiaries, and 1 092 241 (6%) were Hispanic beneficiaries. The CJR model was associated with an increase of 1.6 elective hip or knee replacements per 1000 beneficiary-years for Hispanic beneficiaries (95% CI, 0.06-2.05) and a decrease of 0.64 replacements for Black beneficiaries (95% CI, -1.25 to -0.02). No evidence was found for any changes for White beneficiaries per 1000 beneficiary-years (0.04 replacements, 95% CI, -0.35 to 0.42 replacements). The Black-White difference in the rate of elective hip or knee replacement per 1000 beneficiary-years further widened by 0.68 replacements (-0.68, 95% CI, -1.20 to -0.15). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the CJR model was associated with increased receipt of elective hip or knee replacement among Hispanic beneficiaries, decreased receipt among Black beneficiaries, and no change in receipt among White beneficiaries. The decreased receipt of elective hip or knee replacement among Black beneficiaries may suggest that value-based payment models, including the CJR model, could be monitored for unintended consequences. However, the lack of similar findings among Hispanic beneficiaries suggests that payment models may have differential impacts across racial/ethnic groups.

Spillover effects of mandatory hip and knee replacement surgery bundles in medicare.

BACKGROUND: Medicare used the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model to mandate that hospitals in certain health care markets accept bundled payments for lower extremity joint replacement surgery. CJR has reduced spending with stable quality as intended among Medicare fee-for-service patients, but benefits could "spill over" to individuals insured through private health plans. Definitive evidence of spillovers remains lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes among privately insured individuals. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We used 2013-2017 Health Care Cost Institute claims for 418,016 privately insured individuals undergoing joint replacement in 75 CJR and 121 Non-CJR markets. Multivariable generalized linear models with hospital and market random effects and time fixed effects were used to analyze the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Total episode spending, discharge to institutional post-acute care, and quality (e.g., surgical complications, readmissions). RESULTS: Patients in CJR and Non-CJR markets did not differ in total episode spending (difference of -$157, 95% CI -$1043 to $728, p = 0.73) or discharge to institutional post-acute care (difference of -1.1%, 95% CI -3.2%-1.0%, p = 0.31). Similarly, patients in the two groups did not differ in quality or other utilization outcomes. Findings were generally similar in stratified and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: There was a lack of evidence of cost or utilization spillovers from CJR to privately insured individuals. There may be limits in the ability of certain value-based payment reforms to drive broad changes in care delivery and patient outcomes.

Association of Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment System for Hip and Knee Joint Replacement With Racial/Ethnic Difference in Joint Replacement Care.

Importance: There are marked racial/ethnic differences in hip and knee joint replacement care as well as concerns that value-based payments may exacerbate existing racial/ethnic disparities in care. Objective: To examine changes in joint replacement care associated with Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model among White, Black, and Hispanic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare claims from 2013 through 2017 among White, Black, and Hispanic patients undergoing joint replacement in 67 treatment (selected for CJR participation) and 103 control metropolitan statistical areas. Exposures: The CJR model holds hospitals accountable for spending and quality of joint replacement care during care episodes (index hospitalization through 90 days after discharge). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were spending, discharge to institutional postacute care, and readmission during care episodes. Results: Among 688 346 patients, 442 163 (64.2%) were women, and 87 286 (12.7%) were 85 years or older. Under CJR, spending decreased by $439 for White patients (95% CI, -$718 to -$161; from pre-CJR spending in treatment metropolitan statistical areas of $25 264) but did not change for Black patients and Hispanic patients. Discharges to institutional postacute care decreased for all groups (-2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to -0.4, from pre-CJR risk of 46.2% for White patients; -6.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -2.2, from pre-CJR risk of 59.5% for Black patients; and -4.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -1.0, from pre-CJR risk of 54.3% for Hispanic patients). Readmission risk decreased for Black patients by 3.1 percentage points (95% CI, -5.9 to -0.4, from pre-CJR risk of 21.8%) and did not change for White patients and Hispanic patients. Under CJR, Black-White differences in discharges to institutional postacute care decreased by 3.4 percentage points (95% CI, -6.4 to -0.5, from the pre-CJR Black-White difference of 13.3 percentage points). No evidence was found demonstrating that Black-White differences changed for other outcomes or that Hispanic-White differences changed for any outcomes under CJR. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients receiving joint replacements, CJR was associated with decreased readmissions for Black patients. Furthermore, Black patients experienced a greater decrease in discharges to institutional postacute care relative to White patients, representing relative improvements despite concerns that value-based payment models may exacerbate existing disparities. Nonetheless, differences between White and Black patients in joint replacement care still persisted even after these changes.

Can vertically integrated health systems provide greater value: The case of hospitals under the comprehensive care for joint replacement model?

OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess whether system providers perform better than nonsystem providers under an alternative payment model that incentivizes high-quality, cost-efficient care. We posit that the payment environment and the incentives it provides can affect the relative performance of vertically integrated health systems. To examine this potential influence, we compare system and nonsystem hospitals participating in Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. DATA SOURCES: We used hospital cost and quality data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services linked to data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Compendium of US Health Systems and hospital characteristics from secondary sources. The data include 706 hospitals in 67 metropolitan areas. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated regressions that compared system and nonsystem hospitals' 2017 cost and quality performance providing lower joint replacements among hospitals required to participate in CJR. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among CJR hospitals, system hospitals that provided comprehensive services in their local market had 5.8 percent ($1612) lower episode costs (P = .01) than nonsystem hospitals. System hospitals that did not provide such services had 3.5 percent ($967) lower episode costs (P = .14). Quality differences between system hospitals and nonsystem hospitals were mostly small and statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: When operating under alternative payment model incentives, vertical integration may enable hospitals to lower costs with similar quality scores.

Impact of Co-Morbidities on the Cost of Care in Primary Elective Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model is the newest iteration of the bundled payment methodology introduced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model, while incentivizing providers to deliver care at a lower cost, does not incorporate any patient-level risk stratification. Our study evaluated the impact of specific medical co-morbidities on the cost of care in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 1258 Medicare patients who underwent primary elective TJA between January 2015 and July 2016 at a single institution. There were 488 males, 552 hips, and the mean age was 71 years. Cost data were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Co-morbidity information was obtained from a manual review of patient records. Fourteen co-morbidities were included in our final multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: The regression models significantly predicted cost variation (P < .001). For index hospital costs, a history of cardiac arrhythmias (P < .001), valvular heart disease (P = .014), and anemia (P = .020) significantly increased costs. For post-acute care costs, a history of neurological conditions like Parkinson's disease or seizures (P < .001), malignancy (P = .001), hypertension (P = .012), depression (P = .014), and hypothyroidism (P = .044) were associated with increases in cost. Similarly, for total episode cost, a history of neurological conditions (P < .001), hypertension (P = .012), malignancy (P = .023), and diabetes (P = .029) were predictors for increased costs. CONCLUSION: The cost of care in primary elective TJA increases with greater patient co-morbidity. Our data provide insight into the relative impact of specific medical conditions on cost of care and may be used in risk stratification in future reimbursement methodologies.

National Representativeness Of Hospitals And Markets In Medicare's Mandatory Bundled Payment Program.

In 2016 Medicare implemented its first mandatory alternative payment model, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program, in which the agency pays clinicians and hospitals a fixed amount for services provided in hip and knee replacement surgery episodes. Medicare made CJR mandatory, rather than voluntary, to produce generalizable evidence on what results Medicare might expect if it scaled bundled payment up nationally. However, it is unknown how markets and hospitals in CJR compare to others nationwide, particularly with respect to baseline quality and spending performance and the structural hospital characteristics associated with early savings in CJR. Using data from Medicare, the American Hospital Association, and the Health Resources and Services Administration, we found differences in structural market and hospital characteristics but largely similar baseline hospital episode quality and spending. Our findings suggest that despite heterogeneity in hospital characteristics associated with early savings in CJR, Medicare might nonetheless reasonably expect similar results by scaling CJR up to additional urban markets and increasing total program coverage to areas in which 71 percent of its beneficiaries reside. In contrast, different policy designs may be needed to extend market-level programs to other regions or enable different hospital types to achieve savings from bundled payment reimbursement.

Improved patient blood management and cost saving in hip replacement surgery through the implementation of pre-operative Sucrosomial® iron supplementation: a quality improvement assessment study.

PURPOSE: To compare post-operative recovery of prosthetic hip surgery patients with or without the implementation of iron supplementation with a new highly absorbable oral iron formulation. METHODS: Observational retrospective quality improvement assessment conducted on patients who had undergone elective prosthetic hip surgery (first implant) with ferritin < 100 mcg/dl and Hb values between 13 and 14 g/dl for men and 12 g/dl and 13.5 g/dl for women, or having ferritin levels > 100 mcg/dl but C-reactive protein (CRP) > 3 mg/l and transferrin saturation (TSAT) < 20%, which together are suggestive of functional iron deficiency. The analysis compared a group of non-anaemic patients having ferritin levels > 100 mcg/l to two groups of patients with iron deficiency, of which only one received iron supplementation. Measurements included haemoglobin levels, length of hospital stay, and number of transfused patients/blood units. RESULTS: Patients with iron deficiency supplemented with Sideral® Forte compared to non-supplemented patients showed a smaller decline in post-operative Hb (9.7 ± 1.24 g/dl vs 8.4 ± 0.6 g/dl), required shorter hospital stay (4 vs 6.5 days) and less blood transfusions (0 in the iron-supplemented group vs 7 units in the non-iron-supplemented group), yielding an overall savings of 1763.25 €/patient. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative sucrosomial iron supplementation at least 4 weeks prior to elective surgery in non-anaemic patients limits the drop in post-operative Hb levels, determining higher post-operative haemoglobin, quicker post-surgical recovery, shorter hospitalisation, and decreased surgery-related costs.

The Effects of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty on Medicare Spending and Beneficiary Outcomes: Implications for the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model.

BACKGROUND: After the first year in the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, hospitals must repay Medicare for spending above a target price. Hospitals are incentivized to reduce spending in a 90-day episode and generate internal cost savings through, for example, the use of lower-cost implants. METHODS: We used a Markov model to compare quality-adjusted life-years and lifetime costs of total hip arthroplasty, under Medicare fee-for-service (baseline) and under alternative revision rate assumptions (prospective CJR scenarios). Results were generated for 65-year-old and 75-year-old male and female Medicare beneficiaries using baseline spending and revision rates from Medicare claims. We estimated the impact of CJR on 90-day spending. We ran sensitivity analyses for revision rates. RESULTS: Under willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000, $100,000, and $150,000, the baseline scenario was more cost-effective than the CJR scenario for a 65-year-old male patient if the revision risk increases by at least 7% (95% confidence interval for CJR savings: 4%-22%), 5% (range, 3%-7%), or 3% (range, 1%-5%), respectively. For males aged 75 years and females, revision risk needs to increase by a greater percentage under CJR relative to baseline for Medicare fee-for-service to be more cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The CJR model holds great promise. However, it incentivizes hospitals to choose lower-cost implants and adopt newer technology more slowly, which could potentially increase revision rates and offset benefits of the program. Policy makers should monitor revision rates and consider changes to the CJR model to ensure beneficiary access to valuable technology.

CMS hospital readmission reduction program and anticoagulants received following a total hip and knee arthroplasty discharge.

OBJECTIVES: To assess association between 30 day readmission rate and treatment received after total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) discharge (rivaroxaban vs. warfarin or non-anticoagulant). To subsequently model impact of increasing rivaroxaban use on the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) penalty, which was imposed on hospitals with excess 30 day readmissions after hospitalizations for selected conditions, including THA/TKA. METHODS: The US Truven Health MarketScan Medicare Supplemental database from 1 July 2010 to 30 April 2015 was used. A retrospective claims analysis was conducted to assess the risk of all-cause 30 day readmission among patients receiving either rivaroxaban or warfarin, or no anticoagulation following THA/TKA discharge. Simulations were performed to estimate the impact of post-discharge treatment on the HRRP penalty. RESULTS: The risk-adjusted all-cause 30 day readmission rates were 1.21% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.94%-1.49%), 1.41% (95% CI: 1.19%-1.58%) and 1.95% (95% CI: 1.81%-2.11%) for rivaroxaban, warfarin and non-anticoagulant cohorts, respectively. Using these rates, simulations illustrated that when switching patients from warfarin or non-anticoagulant to rivaroxaban, annual penalty per hospital would be reduced up to 67% or 88%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban treatment post-THA/TKA discharge reduced the risk of 30 day readmission compared to non-anticoagulants. Simulations illustrated that increasing rivaroxaban use could decrease the HRRP penalty.

Reducing complications and overall healthcare costs of hip fracture management: a retrospective study on the application of a Diagnostic Therapeutic Pathway in the Cosenza General Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic Therapeutic Pathways (DTPs) are multidisciplinary plans designed by each healthcare organization for a specific category of patients to reduce the variability of professional behaviors and to ensure greater safety and better overall healthcare outcomes. Hip fractures are a frequent traumatic injury, particularly in the elderly, and DTPs recommend early surgical intervention, often not done due to organizational challenges and bureaucracy. Medical conditions suggesting a delay are not frequent, however long waiting times not only increase the risk of complications and mortality, but also increase the number of diagnostic test and physician consultations. This study tried to understand the benefits of performing surgical intervention within 48 hours in terms of cost savings, reduction of complications and better overall outcomes. We performed statistical analyses on data gathered from 130 patients submitted to DTPs, and we evaluated the benefits obtained by operating within 48 hours in terms of resource saving (number of physician consultations, hospitalization days, etc.), reduction in complications reported in the literature. METHODS: About 40% of clinical records of femoral fractures from 2015 at the Cosenza General Hospital were used in our statistical analysis taking into account independent variables such as age, sex,surgery waiting times and ASA (e.g. American Society of Anesthesiologists) score. Additionally, dependent variables such as: the type of complications during the hospital stay (e.g. infections, delirium, etc), days of hospitalization, and number of physician consultations were considered. RESULTS: The average waiting time for surgical intervention was 5.48 days (132 hr). Patients with ASA score of 4 had a greater chance of complications (p-value 0.03), whereas patients operated within 48 hours avoided complications, and spent fewer days in the hospital. The ASA score value correlated positively with the number of physician consultation, as the ASA score increased in number, so did the number of physician consultations. Moreover, each additional day of waiting increased the possibility of physician consultation by approximately 13. CONCLUSION: The lack of available hospital beds and staff shortages are the main reasons for the delay in performing surgery, this situation does not allow an efficient treatment and timely release of patients from the healthcare system. Therefore, there is an important need to implement standardized orthopedic and geriatric pathways (DTPs), inspired by the collaboration between healthcare system management, orthopedic and geriatric specialists, and physical therapists, to drive shorter days of hospitalization and better overall patient health outcome by performing surgery as soon as possible.

Hip Fracture Does Not Belong in the Elective Arthroplasty Bundle: Presentation, Outcomes, and Service Utilization Differ in Fracture Arthroplasty Care.

BACKGROUND: Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement is the same for hip arthroplasty performed electively for arthritis and urgently for femoral neck fracture. METHODS: An analytic report of hip arthroplasty for a 5-hospital network identified 2362 cases performed from January 2014 to May 2016. Resource utilization was determined using 90-day charges. RESULTS: The fracture population (623 hips) was older (P < .01), had more medical comorbidities (28.3% vs 3.8%, P < .01), and was more likely to be anemic and malnourished (P < .01), and had longer hospital stay (5.7 vs 3.0 days, P < .0001), more frequent intensive care unit admission (4.5% vs 0.5%, P < .01), less frequent discharge to home (16.2% vs 83.6%, P < .01), more emergency department visits (26.5% vs 10.7%, P < .01), and more readmissions after hospital discharge (25.2% vs 12.2%, P < .01). Utilization of services ($50,875 vs $38,705, P < .0001) and the standard deviation of these services ($22,509 vs $9,847, P < .0001), from 90-day charges, were significantly greater in the fracture population. CONCLUSION: This study supports exclusion of fracture care from the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement bundled payment program.

Is treatment of geriatric hip fracture patients cost-covering? Results of a prospective study conducted at a German University Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures have increased medical and socio-economic importance due to demographic transition. Information concerning direct treatment costs and their reimbursement in Germany is lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred two hip fracture patients older than 60 years of age were observed prospectively at a German University Hospital. Treatment costs were determined with up to 196 cost factors and compared to the reimbursement. Finally, statistical analysis was performed to identify clinical parameters influencing the cost-reimbursement relation. RESULTS: Treatment costs were 8853 € (95% CI 8297-9410 €), while reimbursement was 8196 € (95% CI 7707-8772 €), resulting in a deficit of 657 € (95% CI 143-1117 €). Bivariate analysis showed that the cost-reimbursement relation was negatively influenced mainly by higher age, higher ASA score, readmission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and red blood cell transfusion. Adjusted for other parameters, readmission to the ICU was a significant negative predictor (- 2669 €; 95% CI - 4070 to - 1268 €; p < 0.001), while age of 60-75 years was a positive predictor for the cost-reimbursement relation (1373 €; 95% CI 265-2480 €; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of geriatric hip fracture patients in a university hospital in Germany does not seem to be cost-covering. Adjustment of the reimbursement for treatment of complex hip fracture patients should be considered.

Does Total Ankle Arthroplasty Belong in the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement?

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model seeks to lower costs and improve quality for primary lower extremity joint replacements. This includes total ankle arthroplasty (TAA), which is performed far less frequently than total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty. We used the SPARCS database to identify 537 TAA and 239,053 elective primary THA or TKA procedures from 2009 to 2014, excluding hip fractures. Compared with THA and TKA, TAA had a shorter mean length of stay (2.2 versus 3.2 days), greater mean cost ($20,817 versus $17,613), lower rate of disposition to nursing and rehabilitation facilities (17% versus 52%), and lower rate of 90-day readmission (4.9% versus 5.8%). In multivariable-adjusted regression models of TAA versus THA and TKA, length of stay was 30% shorter (p < .001), costs were 14% greater (p < .001), and risk of disposition to nursing and rehabilitation facilities was 86% lower (p < .001), with no significant difference in 90-day readmission (p = .957). Patients undergoing TAA had different patterns of short-term resource usage compared with patients undergoing THA and TKA, most notably higher short-term costs. The economic viability of TAA is threatened by alternative payment models that reimburse hospitals for TAA at the same rate as THA and TKA.

The Impact of Discharge Disposition on Episode-of-Care Reimbursement After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) accounts for more Medicare expenditure than any other inpatient procedure. The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model was introduced to decrease cost and improve quality in TJA. The largest portion of episode-of-care costs occurs after discharge. This study sought to quantify the cost variation of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) according to discharge disposition. METHODS: The Medicare and Humana claims databases were used to extract charges and reimbursements to compare day-of-surgery and 91-day postoperative costs simulating episode-of-care reimbursements. Of the patients who underwent primary THA, 257,120 were identified (204,912 from Medicare and 52,208 from Humana). Patients were stratified by discharge disposition: home with home health, skilled nursing facility, or inpatient rehabilitation facility. RESULTS: There is a significant difference in the episode-of-care costs according to discharge disposition, with discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility the most costly and discharge to home the least costly. CONCLUSION: Postdischarge costs represent a sizeable portion of the overall expense in THA, and optimizing patients to allow safe discharge to home may help reduce the cost of THA.

Is Orthopedic Department Teaching Status Associated With Adverse Outcomes Of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Although resident physicians play a vital role in the US health care system, they are believed to create inefficiencies in the delivery of care. Under the regional component of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model, teaching hospitals are forced to compete on efficiency and outcomes with nonteaching hospitals. METHODS: We identified 86,021 patients undergoing elective primary total hip arthroplasty in New York State between January 1, 2009, and September 30, 2014. Outcomes included length and cost of the index admission, disposition, and 90-day readmission. Mixed-effects regression models compared teaching vs nonteaching orthopedic hospitals after adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, hospital, surgeon, and year of surgery. RESULTS: Patients undergoing surgery at teaching hospitals had longer lengths of stay (ß = 3.2%; P < .001) and higher costs of admission (ß = 13.6%; P < .001). There were no differences in disposition status (odds ratio = 1.03; P = .779). The risk of 90-day readmission was lower for teaching hospitals (odds ratio = 0.89; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Primary total hip arthroplasty at teaching orthopedic hospitals is characterized by greater utilization of health care resources during the index admission. This suggests that teaching hospitals may be adversely affected by reimbursement tied to competition on economic and clinical metrics. Although a certain level of inefficiency is inherent during the learning process, these policies may hinder learning opportunities for residents in the clinical setting.

The Association Between Hospital Length of Stay and 90-Day Readmission Risk for Femoral Neck Fracture Patients: Within a Total Joint Arthroplasty Bundled Payment Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroplasty is increasingly performed as a treatment for femoral neck fractures (FNFs). However, these cases have higher complication rates than elective total hip arthroplasties (THAs). The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has created the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model to increase the value of patient care. This model risk stratifies FNF patients in an attempt to appropriately allocate resources, but the formula has not been disclosed. The goal of this study was to ascertain if patients with FNFs have different readmission rates compared to patients undergoing elective THA so that the resource utilization can be assessed. METHODS: We analyzed all patients undergoing THA at our institution during a 21-month period. Patients classified by a diagnosis-related group of 469 or 470 were included. Multivariate and survival analyses were performed to determine risk of 90-day readmission. RESULTS: Patients admitted for FNFs were older, had higher body mass indices, longer lengths of stay, and were more likely to be discharged to inpatient facilities than patients who underwent elective THA. Increased American Society of Anesthesiologists scores and FNF were also independent risk factors for 90-day readmission, and these patient were more likely to be readmitted during the latter 60 days following admission. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that patients who undergo an arthroplasty following urgent or emergent FNFs have inferior outcomes to those receiving an arthroplasty for a diagnosis of arthritis. Fracture patients should either be risk stratified to allow appropriate resource allocation or be excluded from alternative payment initiatives such as Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement.

Tranexamic acid: optimal blood loss management in surface replacement arthroplasty.

AIMS: This study investigated whether the use of tranexamic acid (TXA) decreased blood loss and transfusion related cost following surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA). METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated with TXA during a SRA, who did not receive autologous blood (TXA group) was performed. Two comparison groups were established; the first group comprised of patients who donated their own blood pre-operatively (auto group) and the second of patients who did not donate blood pre-operatively (control). Outcomes included transfusions, post-operative haemoglobin (Hgb), complications, and length of post-operative stay. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2013, 150 patients undergoing SRA were identified for inclusion: 51 in the auto, 49 in the control, and 50 in the TXA group. There were no differences in the pre-operative Hgb concentrations between groups. The mean post-operative Hgb was 11.3 g/dL (9.1 to 13.6) in the auto and TXA groups, and 10.6 g/dL (8.1 to 12.1)in the control group (p = 0.001). Accounting for cost of transfusions, administration of TXA, and length of stay, the cost per patient was $1731, $339, and $185 for the auto, control and TXA groups, respectively. DISCUSSION: TXA use demonstrated higher post-operative Hgb concentrations when compared with controls and decreased peri-operative costs. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Tranexamic acid safely limits allogeneic transfusion, maintains post-operative haemoglobin, and decreases direct and indirect transfusion related costs in surface replacement arthroplasty.

Experience with Designing and Implementing a Bundled Payment Program for Total Hip Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments, also known as episode-based payments, are intended to contain health care costs and promote quality. In 2011 a bundled payment pilot program for total hip replacement was implemented by an integrated health care delivery system in conjunction with a commercial health plan subsidiary. In July 2015 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model to test bundled payment for hip and knee replacement. METHODS: Stakeholders were identified and a structure for program development and implementation was created. An Oversight Committee provided governance over a Clinical Model Subgroup and a Financial Model Subgroup. RESULTS: The pilot program included (1) a clinical model of care encompassing the period from the preoperative evaluation through the third postoperative visit, (2) a pricing model, (3) a program to share savings, and (4) a patient engagement and expectation strategy. Compared to 32 historical controls-patients treated before bundle implementation-45 post-bundle-implementation patients with total hip replacement had a similar length of hospital stay (3.0 versus 3.4 days, p=.24), higher rates of discharge to home or home with services than to a rehabilitation facility (87% versus 63%), similar adjusted median total payments ($22,272 versus $22,567, p=.43), and lower median posthospital payments ($704 versus $1,121, p=.002), and were more likely to receive guideline-consistent care (99% versus 95%, p=.05). DISCUSSION: The bundled payment pilot program was associated with similar total costs, decreased posthospital costs, fewer discharges to rehabilitation facilities, and improved quality. Successful implementation of the program hinged on buy-in from stakeholders and close collaboration between stakeholders and the clinical and financial teams.