Damage Control Plating in Open Tibial Shaft Fractures: A Cheaper and Equally Effective Alternative to Spanning External Fixation.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate damage control plating (DCP) as an alternative to external fixation (EF) in the provisional stabilization of open tibial shaft fractures. Through retrospective analysis, the study found 445 patients who underwent operative fixation for tibial shaft fractures from 2008 to 2012. Twenty patients received DCP or EF before intramedullary nailing with a minimum follow-up of 3 months. Charts and radiographs were reviewed for postoperative complications. Hospital charges were reviewed for implant costs. Nine patients (45%) with DCP and 11 patients (55%) with EF were analyzed. There was no significant difference in the complication rates. The mean implant cost of DCP was $1028, whereas mean EF construct cost was $4204. Therefore, DCP resulted in significant cost savings with no difference in complication rates, making it a valuable alternative to EF for the provisional stabilization of open tibial shaft fractures.

Staged Columnar Fixation of Bicondylar Tibial Plateaus: A Cheaper Alternative to External Fixation.

The objective of this study was to compare complication rates and costs of staged columnar fixation (SCF) to external fixation for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Patients who received SCF or temporary external fixation across a 3-year period at a major level I trauma center underwent a retrospective chart review for associated complications. Fisher's exact analysis was used to determine any statistical difference in complication rates between both groups. However, there was no significant difference in complication rates between the SCF and external fixator groups. Average medial plate costs for SCF were $2131 compared with an average external fixator cost of $4070 (p < .0001). Given that all patients with external fixation undergo eventual medial and lateral plating, savings with SCF include $4070 plus operative costs for removing the fixator. As our health care system focuses on cost-cutting efforts, orthopaedic trauma surgeons must explore cheaper and equally effective treatment alternatives.

Locking Versus Nonlocking Implants in Isolated Lower Extremity Fractures: Analysis of Cost and Complications.

The purpose of this study was to investigate operative costs and postoperative complication rates in relation to utilization of locking versus nonlocking implants in isolated, lower limb fractures. Seventy-seven patients underwent plate fixation of isolated bicondylar tibial plateau, bimalleolar ankle, and trimalleolar ankle fractures at a large tertiary care center. Fixation with locking versus nonlocking implants was compared to incidence of postsurgical complications. Costs of these implants were directly compared. No significant correlation was found between locking versus nonlocking implants and incidence of complications. However, the cost of fixation with locking implants was significantly greater than nonlocking for all fractures. Utilization of more costly locking implants was not associated with reduced postoperative complications compared with nonlocking implants. More attention must be dedicated toward maximizing cost efficiency, since uniform usage of nonlocking implants has the potential to reduce surgical costs without compromising patient outcomes in isolated lower extremity fractures.

Geographic variations in hospital charges and Medicare payments for major joint arthroplasty.

National data on hospital-level charges and Medicare payments have shown that joint arthroplasty is the most common surgical procedure among the elderly. Yet, no study has investigated micro and macro level geographic variations in hospital charges and payment. We used the Medicare Provider Charge Data to investigate Medicare payments and charges for 2750 hospitals accounting for 427,207 patients who underwent major joint arthroplasty and 932 hospitals for 18,714 patients who had a complication/comorbidity. We found a significant difference in hospital charges and payments based on geographic region (P<0.001). We concluded that hospital charges demonstrate a high variability even when using areas to control for differences in hospital wages and high variation in reimbursements in some areas remains unexplained by Medicare's current method of calculating reimbursement.

The risk of adverse events in orthopaedic trauma varies by anatomic region of surgery: an analysis of fifty thousand four hundred and twenty one patients.

PURPOSE: Despite the high-risk nature of orthopaedic trauma, there is a dearth of data exploring adverse events following these interventions. With the current shift towards a reimbursement model grounded on episode-based payments, physicians may face financial penalties for higher rates of peri-operative complications and subsequent hospitalisations. The purpose of this study was thus to assess whether complication rates varied by anatomic region of surgery and to subsequently determine the pre-operative risk factors that elevated patients' chances of developing complications in these regions. METHODS: A total of 50,421 orthopaedic trauma patients treated between 2006 and 2013 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Minor and major complications, demographics, surgical variables and pre-operative comorbidities were collected. Chi-square analyses identified pre-operative differences between the three regions. Multivariate regressions identified risk factors that significantly predicted adverse events. RESULTS: Hip and pelvis (HP) patients were found to be approximately seven times more likely to develop a peri-operative complication than upper extremity (UE) patients [odds ratio (OR) 7.38, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 6.33-8.10, p < 0.001]. In addition, lower extremity (LE) patients were found to be almost three times as likely to develop any complication compared to UE patients (OR 2.80, 95 % CI 2.53-3.09, p < 0.001). Certain risk factors, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and the presence of a bleeding disorder, were significantly correlated with the development of all adverse events for all anatomic regions (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant difference in complication rates between the three cohorts of orthopaedic trauma patients. In addition, the predictability of certain risk factors varied between the three regions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: prognostic level II.

Impact of type of surgery on deep venous thrombi and pulmonary emboli: a look at twenty seven thousand hip fracture patients.

PURPOSE: Deep venous thrombi (DVT) and pulmonary emboli (PE) are common complications in hip fracture patients. It is imperative that orthopaedists know the patient risk factors for DVT and PE, including if type of surgery plays a role. To this end, we used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database to identify significant risk factors. METHODS: From the 2006-2011 ACS NSQIP database, 27,441 patients with hip fractures were identified using a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code search. DVT and PE complications, type of surgery based on CPT code, patient demographics, medical comorbidities and operative factors were identified for each patient. Fisher's exact tests were used to (1) determine if rates of DVT and PE significantly differed based on type of surgery and (2) identify significant associations between patient factors and development of DVT/PE. These significant factors were then used as covariates in multivariable analysis to determine which risk factors predicted postoperative DVT/PE. RESULTS: Of the 27,441 hip fracture patients, 449 (1.6 %) developed DVT/PE. There was a significant difference in rates of DVT/PE based on surgery (p = 0.015): patients undergoing intramedullary nailing of inter-/peri-/subtrochanteric femoral fractures had the highest rates of DVT/PE (2.06 %). After multivariate analysis, renal failure and recent surgery were significant risk factors for DVT/PE. CONCLUSIONS: This study was the first to show through large, multicentre, prospective data that type of hip fracture surgery impacts rates of DVT/PE. We further identified two additional risk factors orthopaedists should be aware of. Knowing these risk factors will help in peri-operative planning to reduce complications.

Regional anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery is associated with significantly more peri-operative complications compared with general anaesthesia.

INTRODUCTION: Although several studies have advocated the use of regional versus general anaesthesia as a means of reducing peri-operative complications from hip fracture surgery, the ideal method of anaesthesia remains controversial. Our purpose was to investigate the association between anaesthesia type and peri-operative complications in hip fracture surgery. METHODS: From the 2005-2011 ACS-NSQIP database, all patients with operatively treated hip fractures were identified using CPT codes, and fifteen peri-operative complications were recorded and categorized as either minor or major. Rates of minor, major, and total complications by anaesthesia type were compared using chi-square and Fischer's exact tests. A multivariate model was used to determine odds of minor, major, and total complications between anaesthesia types. Multivariate analysis was then repeated after combining patients who received regional nerve blocks or spinal anaesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 7,764 hip fracture patients were included in our analysis. Spinal anaesthesia had the highest total complication rate (19.6%), followed by general (17.9%) and regional nerve blocks (12.6%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that spinal anaesthesia was associated with significantly greater odds of minor complications and total complications compared with general anaesthesia. After combining the regional nerve block and spinal anaesthesia groups, multivariate analysis again showed significantly greater odds of minor and total complications with regional versus general anaesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large multi-centre database, we demonstrate that regional anaesthesia was associated with significantly greater odds of minor and total peri-operative complications compared with general anaesthesia. Our results challenge the notion that regional anaesthesia is the preferred method of anaesthesia for hip fractures in the elderly.

What factors influence follow-up in orthopedic trauma surgery?

BACKGROUND: Among surgical patients, follow-up visits are essential for monitoring post-operative recovery and determining ongoing treatment plans. Non-adherence to clinic follow-up appointments has been associated with poorer outcomes in many different patient populations. We sought to identify factors associated with non-attendance at follow-up appointments for orthopedic trauma patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review at a level I trauma center identified 2,165 patients who underwent orthopedic trauma surgery from 2008 to 2009. Demographic data including age, sex, race, tobacco use, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, insurance status, distance from the hospital, and follow-up time were collected. Injury characteristics including fracture type, anatomic location of the operation, length of hospital stay, living situation and employment status were recorded. Attendance at the first scheduled follow-up visit was recorded. Multivariable log-binomial regression analyses were used with statistical significance maintained at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 2,165 patients included in the analysis, 1,449 (66.9 %) attended their first scheduled post-operative clinic visit. 33.1 % (717) were not compliant with keeping their first clinic appointment after surgery. Patients who used tobacco, lived more than 100 miles from the clinic site, did not have private insurance, had an ASA score >2, or had a fracture of the hip or pelvis were significantly less likely to follow-up. Age, sex, and race were not significantly associated with failure to follow-up. DISCUSSION: Follow-up appointments are essential for preventing complications among orthopedic trauma patients. By identifying patients at risk of failure to follow-up, orthopedic surgeons can appropriately design and implement long-term treatment plans specifically targeted for high-risk patients.

Asking for the 22-modifier in isolated ankle fractures: does the operative note make the case?

We evaluated the operative notes for justification on the use of the 22-modifier in ankle fracture cases and compared the differences in physician billing and reimbursement. A total of 265 patients who had undergone operative management of isolated ankle fractures across a 10-year period were identified at a level I trauma center through a retrospective chart review. Of the 265 patients, 61 (23.0%) had been billed with the 22-modifier. The radiographs were reviewed by 3 surgeons to determine the complexity of the case. The amount of the professional fees and payments was obtained from the financial services department. Operative reports were reviewed for inclusion of eight 22-modifier criteria and word count. Mann-Whitney U tests of means were used to compare cases with and without the 22-modifier. From our analysis of preoperative radiographs, 37 (60%) showed evidence of a significantly complex fracture that justified the use of the 22-modifier. A review of the operative reports showed that 42 (68%) did not identify 2 or more reasons for requesting the 22-modifier in the report. Overall, the 22-modifier cases were not always reimbursed significantly greater amounts than the nonmodifier cases. No significant difference in the average word count of the operative notes was found. We have concluded that orthopedic trauma surgeons do not appropriately justify the use of the 22-modifier within their operative report. Further education on modifiers and the use of the operative report as billing documentation is required to ensure surgeons are adequately reimbursed for difficult trauma cases.

Ankle Fractures and Modality of Hospital Transport at a Single Level 1 Trauma Center: Does Transport by Helicopter or Ground Ambulance Influence the Incidence of Complications?

In an era of concern over the rising cost of health care, cost-effectiveness of auxiliary services merits careful evaluation. We compared costs and benefits of Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) with Ground Emergency Medical Service (GEMS) in patients with an isolated ankle fracture. A medical record review was conducted for patients with an isolated ankle fracture who had been transported to a level 1 trauma center by either HEMS or GEMS from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. We abstracted demographic data, fracture grade, complications, and transportation mode. Transportation costs were obtained by examining medical center financial records. A total of 303 patients was included in the analysis. Of 87 (28.71%) HEMS patients, 53 (60.92%) had sustained closed injuries and 34 (39.08%) had open injuries. Of the 216 (71.29%) GEMS patients, 156 (72.22%) had closed injuries and 60 (27.78%) had open injuries. No significant difference was seen between the groups regarding the percentage of patients with open fractures or the grade of the open fracture (p = .07). No significant difference in the rate of complications was found between the 2 groups (p = 18). The mean baseline cost to transport a patient via HEMS was $10,220 + a $108/mile surcharge, whereas the mean transport cost using GEMS was $976 per patient + $16/mile. Because the HEMS mode of emergency transport did not significantly improve patient outcomes, health systems should reconsider the use of HEMS for patients with isolated ankle fractures.

Relationship between the Charlson Comorbidity Index and cost of treating hip fractures: implications for bundled payment.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate how the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores contribute to increased length of stay (LOS) and healthcare costs in hip fracture patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through retrospective analysis at an Urban level I trauma center, charts for all patients over the age of 60 years who presented with low-energy hip fracture were evaluated. 615 patients who underwent operative fixation of hip fracture or hemiarthroplasty secondary to hip fracture were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes search and included in the study. Data was collected on patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and hospitalization length; from this, the CCI score and the cost to the institution (with an average cost/day of inpatient stay of $4,530) were calculated. RESULTS: Multivariate linear regression analysis modeled the length of stay as a function of CCI score. Each unit increase in the CCI score corresponded to an increase in length of hospital stay and hospital costs incurred [effect size = 0.21; (0.0434-0.381); p = 0.014]. Patients with a CCI score of 2 (compared to a baseline CCI score of 0), on average, stayed 1.92 extra days in the hospital, and incurred $8,697.60 extra costs. CONCLUSIONS: The CCI score is associated with length of stay and hospital costs incurred following treatment for hip fracture. The CCI score may be a useful tool for risk assessment in bundled payment plans. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Does Admission to Medicine or Orthopaedics Impact a Geriatric Hip Patient's Hospital Length of Stay?

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to determine the association between admitting service, medicine or orthopaedics, and length of stay (LOS) for a geriatric hip fracture patient. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Urban level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred fourteen geriatric hip fracture patients from 2000 to 2009. INTERVENTIONS: Orthopaedic surgery for geriatric hip fracture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, hospitalization length, and admitting service. Negative binomial regression used to determine association between LOS and admitting service. RESULTS: Six hundred fourteen geriatric hip fracture patients were included in the analysis, of whom 49.2% of patients (n = 302) were admitted to the orthopaedic service and 50.8% (3 = 312) to the medicine service. The median LOS for patients admitted to orthopaedics was 4.5 days compared with 7 days for patients admitted to medicine (P < 0.0001). Readmission was also significantly higher for patients admitted to medicine (n = 92, 29.8%) than for those admitted to orthopaedics (n = 70, 23.1%). After controlling for important patient factors, it was determined that medicine patients are expected to stay about 1.5 times (incidence rate ratio: 1.48, P < 0.0001) longer in the hospital than orthopaedic patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to demonstrate that admission to the medicine service compared with the orthopaedic service increases a geriatric hip fractures patient's expected LOS. Since LOS is a major driver of cost as well as a measure of quality care, it is important to understand the factors that lead to a longer hospital stay to better allocate hospital resources. Based on the results from our institution, orthopaedic surgeons should be aware that admission to medicine might increase a patient's expected LOS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk Factors for Deep Venous Thrombosis Following Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery: An Analysis of 56,000 patients.

BACKGROUND: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are recognized as major causes of morbidity and mortality in orthopaedic trauma patients. Despite the high incidence of these complications following orthopaedic trauma, there is a paucity of literature investigating the clinical risk factors for DVT in this specific population. As our healthcare system increasingly emphasizes quality measures, it is critical for orthopaedic surgeons to understand the clinical factors that increase the risk of DVT following orthopaedic trauma. OBJECTIVES: Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP database, we sought to determine the incidence and identify independent risk factors for DVT following orthopaedic trauma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for orthopaedic trauma procedures, we identified a prospective cohort of patients from the 2006 to 2013 ACS-NSQIP database. Using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests where appropriate, patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative factors were compared between patients who developed a DVT within 30 days of surgery and those who did not. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and identify independent risk factors for DVT. Significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: 56,299 orthopaedic trauma patients were included in the analysis, of which 473 (0.84%) developed a DVT within 30 days. In univariate analysis, twenty-five variables were significantly associated with the development of a DVT, including age (P < 0.0001), BMI (P = 0.037), diabetes (P = 0.01), ASA score (P < 0.0001) and anatomic region injured (P < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis identified several independent risk factors for development of a DVT including use of a ventilator (OR = 43.67, P = 0.039), ascites (OR = 41.61, P = 0.0038), steroid use (OR = 4.00, P < 0.001), and alcohol use (OR = 2.98, P = 0.0370). Compared to patients with upper extremity trauma, those with lower extremity injuries had significantly increased odds of developing a DVT (OR = 7.55, P = 0.006). The trend toward increased odds of DVT among patients with injuries to the hip/pelvis did not reach statistical significance (OR = 4.51, P = 0.22). Smoking was not found to be an independent risk factor for developing a DVT (P = 0.1217). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date using the NSQIP database to identify risk factors for DVT in orthopaedic trauma patients. Although the incidence of DVT was low in our cohort, the presence of certain risk factors significantly increased the odds of developing a DVT following orthopaedic trauma. These findings will enable orthopaedic surgeons to target at-risk patients and implement post-operative care protocols aimed at reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with DVT in orthopaedic trauma patients.

Risk factors for discharge to rehabilitation among hip fracture patients.

Length of stay (LOS) drives costs for hip fracture patients. One factor that affects LOS is delayed transfer of patients to rehabilitation centers. It is therefore imperative that orthopedists have a mechanism for identifying which patients require rehabilitation services after surgery. We conducted a study to identify patient risk factors that are significantly associated with discharge to rehabilitation. Using 2011 ACS-NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) data, we prospectively analyzed the cases of 4815 patients who underwent hip fracture surgery and had discharge information available. Discharge location, surgery type, patient demographics, 32 patient comorbidities, and 7 operative factors were identified in these patients. Fisher exact tests were used to determine which patient factors were significantly associated with discharge to rehabilitation. Of the 4815 patients, 80.3% were discharged to rehabilitation and 19.7% to home. After multivariable analysis, age over 65 years, female sex, dialysis, prior percutaneous coronary intervention, hypertension, general anesthesia, and ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) class higher than 2 had higher odds of discharge to rehabilitation, and DNR (do not resuscitate) status had higher odds of discharge to home. This study was the first to determine which factors predicted discharge to rehabilitation in hip fracture patients. Knowing these risk factors provides orthopedists with a mechanism that can be used to identify which patients require rehabilitation after surgery, thereby facilitating transfer and potentially decreasing LOS and associated costs.

Factors driving readmissions in tibia and femur fractures.

As the American healthcare system shifts towards bundled payments, readmissions will become a measure of healthcare quality. The purpose of this study was to characterize readmission trends and factors influencing readmission in patients with diaphyseal femur and tibia fractures. Through a retrospective chart review, all patients who presented to a level 1 trauma center from 2004 to 2006 were evaluated. By using current procedural terminology codes, 1,040 patients with diaphyseal tibia or femur fractures fixed by IMN were identified. 645 patients were included for analysis. 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day readmission rates were compared with fracture type, reason for readmission, and basic demographic information. The 60-day readmission rate for open tibia fractures (14.8%) was significantly higher than the 60-day readmission rate for closed tibia fractures (8.0%) (p = 0.037). When comparing reasons for 60-day readmissions, 50% of closed fractures were readmitted due to infection, while the other 50% needed additional surgery. 91.7% of open fractures readmitted in 60 days were due to infection. In a bundled payment system, orthopedic trauma must gain insight into drivers of readmission to identify those at risk for readmission and design effective healthcare plans for these patients.

Heterotopic ossification after hemiarthroplasty of the hip - A comparison of three common approaches.

OBJECTIVE: Heterotopic ossification (HO) about the hip after total hip arthroplasty and internal fixation of the hip, pelvis, and acetabulum has been linked to surgical approach. However, no study has investigated surgical approach and HO in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty. We therefore aimed to explore the influence of operative approach in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty. METHODS: Through a retrospective case series at an Urban level I trauma center, we found 80 patients over the age of 60 undergoing hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures from 2000 to 2009. Patient charts, operative notes, and radiographs were reviewed for demographics, operative approach (anterior: A, anterior-lateral: AL, posterior: P), and any development of HO. Fisher's exact test compared rates of HO among the three approaches. Student's t-tests compared Brooker Classification levels of HO among the approaches. RESULTS: 82 hemiarthroplasties (26 A, 32 AL, 24 P) were included for analysis. 22 patients (27%) had HO. There was no significant difference in the development of HO based upon surgical approach: A: 19% (n = 5); AL: 34% (n = 11); P: 25% (n = 6). There was a significant difference in the grade of HO based on Brooker Classification (BC) with the posterior approach resulting in significantly lower grade of HO: A (BC: 2.60); AL (BC: 2.64); P (BC: 1.50) (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Our data is the first to evaluate surgical approach and HO in patients with hemiarthroplasty. Patients have a significant risk of developing higher grade HO based on surgical approach (A or AL). Orthopedists should be mindful of these risks when considering A or AL approaches.

Hip fractures are risky business: an analysis of the NSQIP data.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures are one of the most common types of orthopaedic injury with high rates of morbidity. Currently, no study has compared risk factors and adverse events following the different types of hip fracture surgeries. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the major and minor adverse events and risk factors for complication development associated with five common surgeries for the treatment of hip fractures using the NSQIP database. METHODS: Using the ACS-NSQIP database, complications for five forms of hip surgeries were selected and categorized into major and minor adverse events. Demographics and clinical variables were collected and an unadjusted bivariate logistic regression analyses was performed to determine significant risk factors for adverse events. Five multivariate regressions were run for each surgery as well as a combined regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 9640 patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture were identified with an adverse events rate of 25.2% (n=2433). Open reduction and internal fixation of a femoral neck fracture had the greatest percentage of all major events (16.6%) and total adverse events (27.4%), whereas partial hip hemiarthroplasty had the greatest percentage of all minor events (11.6%). Mortality was the most common major adverse event (44.9-50.6%). For minor complications, urinary tract infections were the most common minor adverse event (52.7-62.6%). Significant risk factors for development of any adverse event included age, BMI, gender, race, active smoking status, history of COPD, history of CHF, ASA score, dyspnoea, and functional status, with various combinations of these factors significantly affecting complication development for the individual surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Hip fractures are associated with significantly high numbers of adverse events. The type of surgery affects the type of complications developed and also has an effect on what risk factors significantly predict the development of a complication. Concerted efforts from orthopaedists should be made to identify higher risk patients and prevent the most common adverse events that occur postoperatively.

Adverse Events in Orthopaedics: Is Trauma More Risky? An Analysis of the NSQIP Data.

OBJECTIVES: As our healthcare system moves toward bundling payments, orthopaedic trauma surgeons will be increasingly benchmarked on perioperative complications. We therefore sought to determine financial risks under bundled payments by identifying adverse event rates for (1) orthopaedic trauma patients compared with general orthopaedic patients and (2) based on anatomic region and (3) to identify patient factors associated with complications. DESIGN: Prospective. SETTING: Multicenter. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 146,773 orthopaedic patients (22,361 trauma) from 2005 to 2011 NSQIP data were identified. INTERVENTIONS: Minor and major adverse events, demographics, surgical variables, and patient comorbidities were collected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Multivariate regressions determined significant risk factors for the development of complications. RESULTS: The complication rate in the trauma group was 11.4% (2554/22,361) versus 4.1% (5137/124,412) in the general orthopaedic group (P = 0.001). When controlling for all variables, trauma was a risk factor for developing complications [odds ratio (OR): 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.57-1.81]. After controlling for several patient factors, hip and pelvis patients were 4 times more likely to develop any perioperative complication than upper extremity patients (OR: 3.79, 95% CI: 3.01-4.79, P = 0.01). Lower extremity patients are 3 times more likely to develop any complication versus upper extremity patients (OR: 2.82, 95% CI: 2.30-3.46, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to show that orthopaedic trauma patients are 2 times more likely than general orthopaedic patients to sustain complications, despite controlling for identical risk factors. There is also an alarming difference in complication rates among anatomic regions. Orthopaedic trauma surgeons will face increased financial risk with bundled payments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Surgical site infection in orthopedic trauma: A case-control study evaluating risk factors and cost.

BACKGROUND: With the shift of our healthcare system toward a value-based system of reimbursement, complications such as surgical site infections (SSI) may not be reimbursed. The purpose of our study was to investigate the costs and risk factors of SSI for orthopedic trauma patients. METHODS: Through retrospective analysis, 1819 patients with isolated fractures were identified. Of those, 78 patients who developed SSIs were compared to 78 uninfected control patients. Patients were matched by fracture location, type of fracture, duration of surgery, and as close as possible to age, year of surgery, and type of procedure. Costs for treatment during primary hospitalization and initial readmission were determined and potential risk factors were collected from patient charts. A Wilcoxon test was used to compare the overall costs of treatment for case and control patients. Costs were further broken down into professional fees and technical charges for analysis. Risk factors for SSIs were analyzed through a chi-squared analysis. RESULTS: Median cost for treatment for patients with SSIs was $108,782 compared to $57,418 for uninfected patients (p < 0.001). Professional fees and technical charges were found to be significantly higher for infected patients. No significant risk factors for SSIs were determined. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the potential for financial losses in our new healthcare system due to uncompensated care. SSIs nearly double the cost of treatment for orthopedic trauma patients. There is no single driver of these costs. Reducing postoperative stay may be one method for reducing the cost of treating SSIs, whereas quality management programs may decrease risk of infection.

The costs of operative complications for ankle fractures: a case control study.

As our healthcare system moves towards bundling payments, it is vital to understand the potential financial implications associated with treatment of surgical complications. Considering that surgical treatment of ankle fractures is common, there remains minimal data relating costs to postsurgical intervention. We aimed to identify costs associated with ankle fracture complications through case-control analysis. Using retrospective analysis at a level I trauma center, 28 patients with isolated ankle fractures who developed complications (cases) were matched with 28 isolated ankle fracture patients without complications (controls) based on ASA score, age, surgery type, and fracture type. Patient charts were reviewed for demographics and complications leading to readmission/reoperation and costs were obtained from the financial department. Wilcoxon tests measured differences in the costs between the cases and controls. 28 out of 439 patients (6.4%) developed complications. Length of stay and median costs were significantly higher for cases than controls. Specifically, differences in total costs existed for infection and hardware-related pain. This is the first study to highlight the considerable costs associated with the treatment of complications due to isolated ankle fractures. Physicians must therefore emphasize methods to control surgical and nonsurgical factors that may impact postoperative complications, especially under a global payment system.