2020 CMS prior authorization for hospital outpatient departments: Associated surgical volume impact.

BACKGROUND: Prior authorization is common for privately administered Medicare Advantage plans but is rarely used for surgical care when considering publicly administered plans. A 2020 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services (CMS) policy, CMS-1717-FC, requires prior authorization for Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries undergoing select procedures (blepharoplasty, abdominoplasty, botulinum toxin injection, rhinoplasty, and vein ablation) in hospital outpatient departments. The impact of this policy on surgical volume at hospital outpatient departments and shifts in care to ambulatory surgery centers is unknown. METHODS: This study used a segmented interrupted time series and pre-post logistic regression model. This study was a retrospective cohort study using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project state ambulatory surgery database and state inpatient database. RESULTS: From 2016 through 2021, a total of 272,879 patients underwent the affected procedures. Pre-CMS-1717-FC, a trend of decreasing hospital outpatient department utilization was found for Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries (-10.82, 95% confidence interval: -18.32 to -3.33, P = .01). In the post-implementation period, no change in the rate of decreasing hospital outpatient department utilization was found for Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries (-3.45, 95% confidence interval: -36.15 to 29.25, P = .83). In the pre-policy period, Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries were 46% less likely to use freestanding ambulatory surgery centers but 27% less likely to use hospital-owned ambulatory surgery centers. CONCLUSION: CMS-1717-FC was not associated with significant changes in hospital outpatient department volume beyond baseline trends. Policy aiming to right-size prior authorization for these procedures and considering site-of-service will balance the need to ensure medical necessity while constraining costs.

Ambulatory Surgery Centers Reduce Patient Out-of-Pocket Expenditures for Isolated Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair, but Patient Out-of-Pocket Expenditures Are Increasing at a Faster Rate Than Total Healthcare Utilization Reimbursement From Payers.

PURPOSE: To categorize and trend annual out-of-pocket expenditures for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) patients relative to total healthcare utilization (THU) reimbursement and compare drivers of patient out-of-pocket expenditures (POPE) in a granular fashion via analyses by insurance type and surgical setting. METHODS: Patients who underwent outpatient arthroscopic RCR in the United States from 2013 to 2018 were identified from the IBM MarketScan Database. Primary outcome variables were total POPE and THU reimbursement, which were calculated for all claims in the 9-month perioperative period. Trends in outcome variables over time and differences across insurance types were analyzed. Multivariable analysis was performed to investigate drivers of POPE. RESULTS: A total of 52,330 arthroscopic RCR patients were identified. Between 2013 and 2018, median POPE increased by 47.5% ($917 to $1,353), and median THU increased by 9.3% ($11,964 to $13,076). Patients with high deductible insurance plans paid $1,910 toward their THU, 52.5% more than patients with preferred provider plans ($1,253, P = .001) and 280.5% more than patients with managed care plans ($502, P = .001). All components of POPE increased over the study period, with the largest observed increase being POPE for the immediate procedure (P = .001). On multivariable analysis, out-of-network facility, out-of-network surgeon, and high-deductible insurance most significantly increased POPE. CONCLUSIONS: POPE for arthroscopic RCR increased at a higher rate than THU over the study period, demonstrating that patients are paying an increasing proportion of RCR costs. A large percentage of this increase comes from increasing POPE for the immediate procedure. Out-of-network facility status increased POPE 3 times more than out-of-network surgeon status, and future cost-optimization strategies should focus on facility-specific reimbursements in particular. Last, ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) significantly reduced POPE, so performing arthroscopic RCRs at ASCs is beneficial to cost-minimization efforts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study highlights that although payers have increased reimbursement for RCR, patient out-of-pocket expenditures have increased at a much higher rate. Furthermore, this study elucidates trends in and drivers of patient out-of-pocket payments for RCR, providing evidence for development of cost-optimization strategies and counseling of patients undergoing RCR.

Using orthopaedic health care resources efficiently: A cost analysis of day surgery for unicompartmental knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Day surgery for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) could potentially reduce hospital costs. We aimed to measure the impact of introducing a day surgery UKR pathway on mean length of stay (LOS) and costs for the UK NHS, compared to an accelerated inpatient pathway. Secondly, the study aimed to compare the magnitude of costs using three costing approaches: top-down costing; simple micro-costing; and real-world costing. METHODS: We conducted an observational, before-and-after study of 2,111 UKR patients at one NHS hospital: 1,094 patients followed the day surgery pathway between September 2017 and February 2020; and 1,017 patients followed the accelerated inpatient pathway between September 2013 and February 2016. Top-down costs were estimated using Average NHS Costs. Simple micro-costing used the cost per bed-day. Real-world costs for this centre were estimated by costing actual changes in staffing levels. RESULTS: 532 (48.5%) patients in the day surgery pathway were discharged on the day of surgery compared with 36 (3.5%) patients in the accelerated inpatient pathway. The day surgery pathway reduced the mean LOS by 2.2 (95% CI: 1.81, 2.53) nights and was associated with an 18% decrease in Average NHS Costs (p < 0.001). Mean savings were £1,429 per patient with the Average NHS Costs approach, £905 per patient with the micro-costing approach, and £577 per patient with the "real-world" costing approach. Overall, moving NHS UKR surgeries to a day surgery pathway could save the NHS £8,659,740 per year. CONCLUSION: Day surgery for UKR could produce substantial cost savings for hospitals and the NHS.

Business and Corporate Models for Interventional Radiology in the Office Based Lab and Ambulatory Surgical Center Setting.

The landscape of healthcare is shifting towards outpatient settings such as Office-Based Labs (OBLs) and Ambulatory Surgery Centers (ASCs). This transition, driven by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), presents various business and corporate models for interventional radiologists seeking to practice outside traditional hospital environments. The role of private equity and management services in facilitating these transitions is highlighted, offering opportunities for growth, efficiency, and enhanced control over practice operations. The document also discusses the financial aspects of establishing an OBL or ASC, the benefits of outpatient procedures, and the adaptability of private equity deals to the specific needs of medical practices. It concludes by emphasizing the potential for long-term wealth creation and the adaptability of these models to individual physician needs.

Comprehensive analysis of same day discharge after atrial fibrillation ablation: Clinical, cost, and patient reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Same day discharge (SDD) following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedure has emerged as routine practice, and primarily driven by operator discretion. However, the impacts of SDD on clinical outcomes, healthcare system costs, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) have not been systematically studied. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing routine AF ablation procedures with SDD versus overnight observation (NSDD). After propensity adjustment we compared postprocedure adverse events (AEs), healthcare system costs, and changes in PROs. RESULTS: We identified 310 cases, with 159 undergoing SDD and 151 staying at least one midnight in the hospital (NSDD). Compared with NSDD, SDD patients were similar age (mean 64 vs. 66, p = 0.3), sex (26% female vs. 27%, p = 0.8), and with lower mean CHADS2-VA2Sc scores (2.0 vs. 2.7; p < 0.011). The primary outcome of AEs was noninferior in SDD versus NSDD patients (odds ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.99; noninferiority margin of 10%). There were also no differences in overall cost to the healthcare system between SDD and NSDD (p = 0.11). PROs numerically favored SDD (p = NS for all scores). CONCLUSIONS: Physician selection for SDD appears at least as safe as NSDD with respect to clinical outcomes and SDD is not significantly less costly to the health system. There is a trend towards more favorable, general PROs among SDD patients. Routine SDD should be strongly considered for patients undergoing routine AF ablation procedures.

Driving Forces for Outpatient Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To explore the recent developments and trends in the anesthetic and surgical practices for total hip and total knee arthroplasty and discuss the implications for further outpatient total joint arthroplasty procedures. RECENT FINDINGS: Between 2012 and 2017 there was an 18.9% increase in the annual primary total joint arthroplasty volume. Payments to physicians falling by 7.5% (14.9% when adjusted for inflations), whereas hospital reimbursements and charges increased by 0.3% and 18.6%, respectively. Total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty surgeries were removed from the Medicare Inpatient Only in January 2018 and January 2020, respectively leading to same-day TKA surgeries increases from 1.2% in January 2016 to 62.4% by December 2020 Same-day volumes for THA surgery increased from 2% in January 2016 to 54.5% by December 2020. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have revolutionized modern anesthesia and surgery practices. Centers for Medicare Services officially removed total joint arthroplasty from the inpatient only services list, opening a new door for improved cost savings to patients and the healthcare system alike. In the post-COVID healthcare system numerous factors have pushed increasing numbers of total joint arthroplasties into the outpatient, ambulatory surgery center setting. Improved anesthesia and surgical practices in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings have revolutionized pain control, blood loss, and ambulatory status, rendering costly hospital stays obsolete in many cases. As the population ages and more total joint procedures are performed, the door is opening for more orthopedic procedures to exit the inpatient only setting in favor of the ambulatory setting.

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in an Outpatient Setting: A Growing Alternative.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have focused on the safety and efficacy of performing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in an outpatient setting. Despite being associated with greater costs, much less is known about the accompanying impact on revision TKA (rTKA). The purpose of this study was to describe the trends in costs and outcomes of patients undergoing inpatient and outpatient rTKA. METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted using commercial claims databases. Patients who underwent 1-component and 2-component rTKA in an inpatient setting, hospital outpatient department (HOPD), or ambulatory surgery center (ASC) from 2018 to 2020 were included. The primary outcome was the 30-day episode-of-care costs following rTKA. Secondary outcomes included surgical cost, 90-day readmission rate, and emergency department visit rate. Covariates for analyses included patient demographics, surgery type, and indication for revision. RESULTS: There were 6,515 patients who were identified, with 17.0% of rTKAs taking place in an outpatient setting. On adjusted analysis, patients in the highest quartile of 30-day postoperative costs were more likely to be those whose rTKA was performed in an inpatient setting. One-component revisions were more common in an outpatient setting (HOPD, 50.7%; ASC, 62.0%) compared to an inpatient setting (39.6%). The 90-day readmission rates were higher (P = .003) for rTKAs performed in inpatient (+9.2%) and HOPD (+8.6%) settings compared to those in an ASC. CONCLUSIONS: The ASC may be a suitable setting for simpler revisions performed for less severe indications and is associated with lower costs and 90-day readmission and emergency department visit rates.

Anesthesia-Related Closed Claims in Free-Standing Ambulatory Surgery Centers.

BACKGROUND: As higher acuity procedures continue to move from hospital-based operating rooms (HORs) to free-standing ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), concerns for patient safety remain high. We conducted a contemporary, descriptive analysis of anesthesia-related liability closed claims to understand risks to patient safety in the free-standing ASC setting, compared to HORs. METHODS: Free-standing ASC and HOR closed claims between 2015 and 2022 from The Doctors Company that involved an anesthesia provider responsible for the claim were included. We compared the coded data of 212 free-standing ASC claims with 268 HOR claims in terms of severity of injury, major injuries, allegations, comorbidities, contributing factors, and financial value of the claim. RESULTS: Free-standing ASC claims accounted for almost half of all anesthesia-related cases (44%, 212 of 480). Claims with high severity of injury were less frequent in free-standing ASCs (22%) compared to HORs (34%; P = .004). The most common types of injuries in both free-standing ASCs and HORs were dental injury (17% vs 17%) and nerve damage (14% vs 11%). No difference in frequency was noted for types of injuries between claims from free-standing ASCs versus HORs--except that burns appeared more frequently in free-standing ASC claims than in HORs (6% vs 2%; P = .015). Claims with alleged improper management of anesthesia occurred less frequently among free-standing ASC claims than HOR claims (17% vs 29%; P = .01), as well as positioning-related injury (3% vs 8%; P = .025). No difference was seen in frequency of claims regarding alleged improper performance of anesthesia procedures between free-standing ASCs and HORs (25% vs 19%; P = .072). Technical performance of procedures (ie, intubation and nerve block) was the most common contributing factor among free-standing ASC (74%) and HOR (74%) claims. Free-standing ASC claims also had a higher frequency of communication issues between provider and patient/family versus HOR claims (20% vs 10%; P = .004). Most claims were not associated with major comorbidities; however, cardiovascular disease was less prevalent in free-standing ASC claims versus HOR claims (3% vs 11%; P = .002). The mean ± standard deviation total of expenses and payments was lower among free-standing ASC claims ($167,000 ± $295,000) than HOR claims ($332,000 ± $775,000; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of medical malpractice claims may indicate higher-than-expected patient and procedural complexity in free-standing ASCs, presenting patient safety concerns and opportunities for improvement. Ambulatory anesthesia practices should consider improving safety culture and communication with families while ensuring that providers have up-to-date training and resources to safely perform routine anesthesia procedures.

Workflow and Patient Satisfaction in Treating Peripheral Arterial Disease in the Office-Based Setting.

Contemporary concepts in health-care reform promote a shift in the provision of care away from hospitals in favor of the more cost-effective and efficient use of outpatient facilities including ambulatory surgery centers and office-based procedure centers particularly in the care of cardiovascular disease. This article reviews the experience of patients and specialists in caring for patients with peripheral arterial disease in an office-based care setting.

Ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery yields cost savings and improved health outcomes.

PURPOSE: This study measured the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and costs and conducted a cost-utility analysis and budget impact analysis of ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery compared with inpatient knee arthroscopic surgery in Thailand from a societal perspective. METHODS: Health outcomes were measured in units of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) based on the Thai version of the EQ-5D-5L Health Questionnaire, and costs were obtained from an electronic database at a tertiary care hospital (Ramathibodi Hospital). A cost-utility analysis was performed to evaluate ambulatory and inpatient surgery using the societal perspective and a 2-week time horizon. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was applied to examine the costs and QALYs. One-way sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the robustness of the model. Budget impact analysis was performed considering over 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 161 knee arthroscopic patients were included and divided into two groups: ambulatory surgery (58 patients) and inpatient surgery (103 patients). The total cost of the inpatient surgery was 2235 United States dollars (USD), while the ambulatory surgery cost was 2002 USD. The QALYs of inpatient surgery and ambulatory surgery were 0.79 and 0.81, respectively, resulting in the ambulatory surgery becoming a dominant strategy (cost reduction of 233 USD with an increase of 0.02 QALY) over the inpatient surgery. The ambulatory surgery led to net savings of 4.5 million USD over 5 years. Medical supply costs are one of the most influential factors affecting the change in results. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery emerged as a cost-saving strategy over inpatient surgery, driven by lower treatment costs and enhanced HRQoL. Budget impact analysis indicated net savings over 5 years, supporting the feasibility of adopting ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery. Our findings were advocated for its application across diverse hospitals and informed policymakers to improve reimbursement systems in low- to middle-income countries and Thailand. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

The cost evaluation of day-case compared to inpatient cochlear implantation in adults: subanalysis of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the assumption that day-case cochlear implantation is associated with lower costs, compared to inpatient cochlear implantation, while maintaining equal quality of life (QoL) and hearing outcomes, for the Dutch healthcare setting. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Thirty adult patients with post-lingual bilateral sensorineural hearing loss eligible for unilateral cochlear implantation surgery were randomly assigned to either the day-case or inpatient treatment group (i.e., one night admission). We performed an intention-to-treat evaluation of the difference of the total health care-related costs, hospital and out of hospital costs, between day-case and inpatient cochlear implantation, from a hospital and patient perspective over the course of one year. Audiometric outcomes, assessed using CVC scores, and QoL, assessed using the EQ-5D and HUI3 questionnaires, were taken into account. RESULTS: There were two drop-outs. The total health care-related costs were €41,828 in the inpatient group (n = 14) and €42,710 in the day-case group (n = 14). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 days (mean costs of €1,069) in the inpatient group and 0.7 days (mean costs of €701) for the day-case group. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital and out of hospital costs. The QoL at 2 months and 1 year postoperative, measured by the EQ-5D index value and HUI3 showed no statistically significant difference. The EQ-5D VAS score measured at 1 year postoperatively was statistically significantly higher in the inpatient group (84/100) than in the day-case group (65/100). There were no differences in postoperative complications, objective hearing outcomes, and number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits. CONCLUSION: A day-case approach to cochlear implant surgery does not result in a statistically significant reduction of health care-related costs compared to an inpatient approach and does not affect the surgical outcome (complications and objective hearing measurements), QoL, and postoperative course (number of postoperative hospital and out of hospital visits).

Are Quality Scores in the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System Associated With Outcomes After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery?

BACKGROUND: The Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) ties reimbursement incentives to clinician performance to improve healthcare quality. It is unclear whether the MIPS quality score can accurately distinguish between high-performing and low-performing clinicians. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What were the rates of unplanned hospital visits (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions) within 7, 30, and 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries? (2) Was there any association of MIPS quality scores with the risk of an unplanned hospital visit (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions)? METHODS: Between January 2018 and December 2019, a total of 605,946 outpatient orthopaedic surgeries were performed in New York State according to the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Of those, 56,772 patients were identified as Medicare beneficiaries and were therefore potentially eligible. A further 34% (19,037) were excluded because of missing surgeon identifier, age younger than 65 years, residency outside New York State, emergency department visit on the same day as outpatient surgery, observation stay on the same claim as outpatient surgery, and concomitant high-risk or eye procedures, leaving 37,735 patients for analysis. The database does not include a list of all state residents and thus does not allow for censoring of patients who move out of state. We chose this dataset because it includes nearly all hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers in a large geographic area (New York State) and hence is not limited by sampling bias. We included 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical encounters among Medicare beneficiaries in New York State from 2018 to 2019. For the 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures included in our study, the mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 73 ± 7 years, 84% (31,550) were White, and 59% (22,071) were women. Our key independent variable was the MIPS quality score percentile (0 to 19th, 20th to 39th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th) for orthopaedic surgeons. Clinicians in the MIPS program may receive a bonus or penalty based on the overall MIPS score, which ranges from 0 to 100 and is a weighted score based on four subscores: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. The MIPS quality score, which attempts to reward clinicians providing superior quality of care, accounted for 50% and 45% of the overall MIPS score in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Our main outcome measures were 7-day, 30-day, and 90-day unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. To determine the association between MIPS quality scores and unplanned hospital visits, we estimated multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models controlling for MIPS quality scores; patient-level (age, race and ethnicity, gender, and comorbidities), facility-level (such as bed size and teaching status), surgery and surgeon-level (such as surgical procedure and surgeon volume) covariates; and facility-level random effects. We then used these models to estimate the adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits across MIPS quality score percentiles after adjusting for covariates in the multivariable models. RESULTS: In total, 2% (606 of 37,735), 2% (783 of 37,735), and 3% (1013 of 37,735) of encounters had an unplanned hospital visit within 7, 30, or 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery, respectively. Most hospital visits within 7 days (95% [576 of 606]), 30 days (94% [733 of 783]), or 90 days (91% [924 of 1013]) were because of emergency department visits. We found very small differences in unplanned hospital visits by MIPS quality scores, with the 20th to 39th percentile of MIPS quality scores having 0.71% points (95% CI -1.19% to -0.22%; p = 0.004), 0.68% points (95% CI -1.26% to -0.11%; p = 0.02), and 0.75% points (95% CI -1.42% to -0.08%; p = 0.03) lower than the 0 to 19th percentile at 7, 30, and 90 days, respectively. There was no difference in adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits between patients undergoing surgery with a surgeon in the 0 to 19th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th percentiles at 7, 30, or 90 days. CONCLUSION: We found that the rates of unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries were low and primarily driven by emergency department visits. We additionally found only a small association between MIPS quality scores for individual physicians and the risk of an unplanned hospital visit after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. These findings suggest that policies aimed at reducing postoperative emergency department visits may be the best target to reduce overall postoperative unplanned hospital visits and that the MIPS program should be eliminated or modified to more strongly link reimbursement to risk-adjusted patient outcomes, thereby better aligning incentives among patients, surgeons, and the Centers for Medicare ad Medicaid Services. Future work could seek to evaluate the association between MIPS scores and other surgical outcomes and evaluate whether annual changes in MIPS score weighting are independently associated with clinician performance in the MIPS and regarding clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

In-office Transoral Hilar Sialolithotomy: A Cost-Effective and Patient-Centered Procedure.

Transoral sialolithotomy performed in-office under local anesthesia is routinely performed for distal submandibular stones. We demonstrate the senior author's novel practice of in-office transoral sialolithotomy for hilar and intraglandular stones. A review of cases performed by the senior author revealed similar rates of complication and stone recurrence as those reported in the literature from removal under general anesthesia. Laryngoscope, 134:4042-4044, 2024.

Telephonic follow-up after day case pediatric surgery in an upper middle income country: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: One third of South African children live in households with no employed adult. Telemedicine may save patients and the strained public health sector significant resources. We aimed to determine the safety and benefits of telephonic post-operative follow-up of patients who presented for day case surgery at CHBAH from 1 January-31 March 2023. METHODS: A prospective descriptive study on patients undergoing day case surgery was performed. Healthy patients greater than 6 years old whose caregivers spoke English and had access to a smartphone were included. Data on the total number of telephonic follow-ups, operative complications, need for in person review, satisfaction with telephonic follow-up, and savings in transport costs and time by avoiding in person follow-up were collected. RESULTS: A total of 38 telephonic follow-ups were performed. Six (15.8%) patients presented for in person review due to the detection of major complications (2, 5.3%), minor complications (2, 5.3%), and parental concern (2, 5.3%) during telephonic follow-up. All caregivers reported being satisfied with telephonic follow-up. Total savings in transport costs were R4452 (US $ 248.45). The majority of patients (29, 76.3%) had at least one unemployed parent. Seven caregivers (18.4%) avoided taking paid leave and 2 (5.3%) unpaid leave from work due to follow-up being performed telephonically. CONCLUSIONS: Innovation is necessary in order to expand access to safe, affordable, and timely care. In this selected group, telephonic follow-up was a safe, acceptable, and cost-effective intervention. The expansion of such a program has the potential for significant savings for patients and the healthcare system.

The effect of a bundle intervention for ambulatory otorhinolaryngology procedures on same-day case cancellation rate and associated costs.

Cancellations within 24 h of planned elective surgical procedures reduce operating theatre efficiency, add unnecessary costs and negatively affect patient experience. We implemented a bundle intervention that aimed to reduce same-day case cancellations. This consisted of communication tools to improve patient engagement and new screening instruments (automated estimation of ASA physical status and case cancellation risk score plus four screening questions) to identify patients in advance (ideally before case booking) who needed comprehensive pre-operative risk stratification. We studied patients scheduled for ambulatory surgery with the otorhinolaryngology service at a single centre from April 2021 to December 2022. Multivariable logistic regression and interrupted time-series analyses were used to analyse the effects of this intervention on case cancellations within 24 h and costs. We analysed 1548 consecutive scheduled cases. Cancellation within 24 h occurred in 114 of 929 (12.3%) cases pre-intervention and 52 of 619 (8.4%) cases post-intervention. The cancellation rate decreased by 2.7% (95%CI 1.6-3.7%, p < 0.01) during the first month, followed by a monthly decrease of 0.2% (95%CI 0.1-0.4%, p < 0.01). This resulted in an estimated $150,200 (£118,755; €138,370) or 35.3% cost saving (p < 0.01). Median (IQR [range]) number of days between case scheduling and day of surgery decreased from 34 (21-61 [0-288]) pre-intervention to 31 (20-51 [1-250]) post-intervention (p < 0.01). Patient engagement via the electronic health record patient portal or text messaging increased from 75.9% at baseline to 90.8% (p < 0.01) post-intervention. The primary reason for case cancellation was patients' missed appointment on the day of surgery, which decreased from 7.2% pre-intervention to 4.5% post-intervention (p = 0.03). An anaesthetist-driven, clinical informatics-based bundle intervention decreases same-day case cancellation rate and associated costs in patients scheduled for ambulatory otorhinolaryngology surgery.

Same day discharge colon surgery: is it financially worth it?

AIM: Same day discharge (SDD) for colorectal surgery shows increasing promise in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and minimally invasive surgery. It has become increasingly relevant due to the constraints posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to compare SDD and postoperative day 1 (POD1) discharge to understand the clinical outcomes and financial impact on factors such as cost, charge, revenue, contribution margin and readmission. METHOD: A retrospective review of colectomies was performed at a single institution over a 2-year period (n = 143). Two populations were identified: SDD (n = 51) and POD1 (n = 92). Patients were selected by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 (ICD-10) and Diagnosis Related Grouper (DRG) codes. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference favouring SDD in total hospital cost (p < 0.0001), average direct costs (p < 0.0001) and average charges (p < 0.0016). SDD average hospital costs were $8699 (values in USD throughout) compared with $11 652 for POD 1 (p < 0.0001), and average SDD hospital charges were $85 506 compared with $97 008 for POD1 (p < 0.0016). The net revenue for SDD was $22 319 while for POD1 it was $26 173 (p = 0.14). Upon comparison of contribution margins (SDD $13 620 vs. POD1 $14 522), the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.73). There were no identified statistically significant differences in operating room time, robotic console time, readmission rates or surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Amidst the pandemic-related constraints, we found that SDD was associated with lower hospital costs and comparable contribution margins compared with POD1. Additionally, the study was unable to identify any significant difference between operating time, readmissions, and surgical complications when performing SDD.

Editorial Commentary: Increasing Patient Out-of-Pocket Expense Does Not Increase Value of Outpatient Surgery.

In a value-based care environment, a goal is to favor outpatient surgery to reduce costs. Unfortunately, while outpatient (as compared to inpatient) surgery reduces overall cost, recent research shows that by including patient out-of-pocket expense (POPE), the proportion of overall cost born by the patient can greatly increase, which is unjust. The primary contributors to high outpatient surgery POPE are out-of-network facilities, out-of-network surgeons, and high-deductible insurance. Although historical focus on outpatient surgical cost reductions has been toward surgeon fees, anesthesia fees, facility fees, and implant fees, we must also focus on POPE. In the interim, it is essential to provide patients with price transparency, so that they understand their anticipated expenses and are not blindsided by cost burden.

Safety and Outcome Measures of Ankle Open Reduction and Internal Fixation in an Ambulatory Surgical Center.

The transition of traditionally hospital-based orthopedic procedures to the ambulatory surgery center setting provides many benefits from a patient care and financial perspective. Specifically, closed ankle fractures can potentially be managed at such centers without needing hospitalization. Adding to the paucity of data, this study describes the safety, cost, and outcomes of patients undergoing ankle fracture repair in an ambulatory surgery center. A retrospective chart review of 100 patients who underwent ankle fracture open reduction and internal fixation from a single ambulatory surgery center by 1 surgeon were reviewed. Demographic data, surgical characteristics including operating time and cost were collected. Short- and long-term complications, as well as, reoperation rates were reported and functional outcomes were described. Of the 100 patients, 59% were female and the overall average age was 50 ± 16 years. The average cost per case was $8,709.63 ± 6,360.18. The short-term complication rate was 16%, with surgical site infection reported as the most common complication. No postoperative hospital admissions were reported. Planned and unplanned hardware removal was performed in 7% and 5% of patients, respectively. The delayed union rate was 13%, in which 86% shared a history of smoking. Smoking history was the only statistically significant predictor of prolonged bone healing (p = .002). This investigation demonstrates low complications rates for surgeries performed in a surgery center when compared to historical rates of those procedures performed in the hospital. These results suggest that ambulatory surgery center-based ankle fracture repair does not increase complications while may decrease overall cost when compared to ankle ORIF in a hospital setting.

Major ambulatory surgery among US adults with inflammatory bowel disease, 2017.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have higher health services use than those without IBD. We investigated patient and hospital characteristics of major ambulatory surgery encounters for Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) vs non-IBD patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using 2017 Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample. Major ambulatory surgery encounters among patients aged ≥18 years with CD (n = 20,635) or UC (n = 9,894) were compared to 9.4 million encounters among non-IBD patients. Weighted percentages of patient characteristics (age, sex, median household income, primary payers, patient location, selected comorbidities, discharge destination, type of surgeries) and hospital-related characteristics (hospital size, ownership, location and teaching status, region) were compared by IBD status (CD, UC, and no IBD). Linear regression was used to estimate mean total charges, controlling for these characteristics. RESULTS: Compared with non-IBD patients, IBD patients were more likely to have private insurance, reside in urban areas and higher income zip codes, and undergo surgeries in hospitals that were private not-for-profit, urban teaching, and in the Northeast. Gastrointestinal surgeries were more common among IBD patients. Some comorbidities associated with increased risk of surgical complications were more prevalent among IBD patients. Total charges were 9% lower for CD patients aged <65 years (Median: $16,462 vs $18,106) and 6% higher for UC patients aged ≥65 years (Median: $16,909 vs $15,218) compared to their non-IBD patient counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in characteristics of major ambulatory surgery encounters by IBD status may identify opportunities for efficient resource allocation and positive surgical outcomes among IBD patients.