The Relative Importance of Factors That Applicants Weigh When Ranking Adult Reconstruction Fellowships as Well as Their Perspectives on Robotic-Assisted Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic Surgery Fellowship programs offer highly specialized training that varies based on the training environment and surgical experience. Additionally, for Adult Reconstruction programs, robotic-assisted surgery exposure has been a widely discussed topic. The purpose of this study was to determine the relative value of various factors to Adult Hip and Knee Fellowship applicants, and their perceptions of robotic-assisted arthroplasty. METHODS: We surveyed 780 applicants who applied to our fellowship to matriculate in 2020 to 2024. We received 158 responses (20.3% response rate). We assessed factors concerning people and perceptions, logistics, salary and benefits, program reputation and curriculum, and surgical experience. Additionally, we surveyed fellows' attitudes toward using robotic surgery and its impact on patient outcomes. RESULTS: The highest-rated factors were Level of Hands-On Operative Experience (4.83), Revision Hip Volume (4.72), Revision Knee Volume (4.71), Multiple Surgical Exposures to the Hip (4.59), and Clinical Case Variety (4.59). Respondents who were postfellowship matriculation placed significantly more value on Exposure to Multiple Attendings with Surgical Diversity (P = .01), and Anterior Hip Volume (P = .04), and less value on Geographic Location (P = .04) and Patient-Specific Instrumentation (P = .02) than prematriculates. Overall, 65% of applicants plan to or currently use robotics, 7.6% do not, and 27.2% said "Maybe". Those who plan to or currently use robotics most cited procedure fidelity, patient-preference, and marketability as reasons to use robotics. CONCLUSIONS: Hands-on surgical experience and revision volume were the most important factors for fellowship applicants. Applicants placed lower importance on robotics exposure and their perspectives on robotics in their future practice were highly variable. Our results will inform fellowship programs and future applicants what previous applicants have valued in their training to help guide fellowship program structure, resource management, as well as recruitment.

Arthroscopic Procedures Are Performed in 5% of Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis 1 Year Preceding Total Knee Arthroplasty and Are Associated With Increased Stiffness and Increased Costs.

Purpose: To describe the different types of arthroscopic procedures that patients undergo in the year prior to total knee arthroplasty (TKA), reveal the cost associated with these procedures, and understand the relationship between preoperative arthroscopy and clinical outcomes after TKA. Methods: An observational cohort study was conducted using the IBM Watson Health MarketScan databases. Patients with knee osteoarthritis who underwent unilateral isolated primary TKA between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019, were included. Knee arthroscopic procedures performed in the 1-year period before a primary TKA was identified. The primary outcomes of interest were cost of these procedures and the risk of 90-day postoperative complications. Results: In total, 2,904 patients, representing 5.2% of the analyzed cohort, underwent arthroscopic procedures in the year prior to TKA. The most common procedure and diagnosis were meniscectomy and meniscal tear, respectively, with procedures performed an average of 7.2 ± 3.0 months before TKA. Average per patient costs were $9,716 ± $5,500 in the highest payment quartile vs $1,789 ± 636 in the lowest payment quartile. Patients with a history of arthroscopy were more likely to develop postoperative stiffness (P = .001), while no difference was found in the risk of 90-day periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Conclusions: Of the patients, 5.2% underwent knee arthroscopy in the year prior to TKA. While no association was seen with PJI risk, the costs associated with these procedures are high and may increase the overall cost of management of knee osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

The trend and future projection of technology-assisted total knee arthroplasty in the United States.

BACKGROUND: As technology-assisted surgery has boosted in the last decades, we aimed to investigate the factors affecting adoption and to predict the future utilization of technology among patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Patients underwent TKA in 2017-2019 in the MarketScan Database were included. Percentage of technology-assisted surgery was calculated. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to analyse the factors and make the prediction. RESULTS: Of 112,161 TKA procedures, 7.2% were technology-assisted. The proportion of technology-assisted TKA is expected to reach 50% by 2032. The West showed the highest proportion of technology-assisted TKA (12.3%), while the South had the lowest (5.7%). Over time, the Midwest showed the greatest increase in technology adoption (OR = 1.26 compared to the Northeast, 95% CI [1.15, 1.38]). CONCLUSIONS: Technology adoption rate of TKA will continue to increase for the next 20 years in the United States with a slight geographical variation.

A Safe Number of Perioperative Opioids to Reduce the Risk of New Persistent Usage Among Opioid-Naïve Patients Following Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Higher initial opioid dosing increases the risk of prolonged opioid use following total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and the safe amounts to prescribe are unknown. We examined the relationship between perioperative opioid exposure and new persistent usage among opioid-naïve patients after total knee and hip arthroplasty. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, 22,310 opioid-naïve patients undergoing primary TJA between 2018 and 2019 were identified within a commercial claims database. Perioperative opioid exposure was defined as total dose of opioid prescription in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) between 1 month prior to and 2 weeks after TJA. New persistent usage was defined as at least one opioid prescription between 90 and 180 days postoperatively. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship between the perioperative dosage group and the development of new persistent usage. RESULTS: For the total patient cohort, 8.1% developed new persistent usage. Compared to patients who received <300 MME, patients who received 600-900 MME perioperatively had a 77% increased risk of developing new persistent usage (odds ratio 1.77, 95% CI, 1.44-2.17), and patients who received ≥1,200 MME perioperatively had a 285% increased risk (odds ratio 3.85, 95% CI, 3.13-4.74). CONCLUSION: We found a dose-dependent association between perioperative MME and the risk of developing new persistent usage among opioid-naïve patients following TJA. We recommend prescribing <600 MME (equivalent to 80 pills of 5 mg oxycodone) during the perioperative period to reduce the risk of new persistent usage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Costs of Nonoperative Procedures for Knee Osteoarthritis in the Year Prior to Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The convergence of national priorities to reduce health-care costs and deliver high-value care warrants the need to examine health-care utilization. The objective of this study was to describe the costs associated with nonoperative procedures in the 1-year period leading up to primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted using the IBM Watson Health MarketScan databases. Patients with late-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent unilateral, isolated primary TKA from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, were included. The main outcome was the cost of knee OA-related payments for identified nonoperative procedures in the 1-year period before surgery. Nonoperative procedures examined were (1) physical therapy (PT); (2) bracing; (3) intra-articular injections: professional fee, hyaluronic acid (IA-HA), and corticosteroids (IA-CS); (4) medication: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and acetaminophen; and (5) knee-specific imaging. RESULTS: The study population included 24,492 TKA patients with a mean age of 60.4 ± 8.0 years. The average total cost of nonoperative procedures per patient was $1,355 ± $2,087. The most common nonoperative treatment prescribed was IA-CS (54.3%). The nonoperative procedure with the highest cost per patient was IA-HA ($1,019 ± $913 per patient). The total cost of nonoperative procedures was higher among female compared with male patients ($1,440 ± $2,159 versus $1,254 ± $1,992 per patient; p < 0.01). The highest costs were found for patients in the Northeast ($1,740 ± $2,437 per patient). A total of 14,346 (58.6%) and 7,831 (32.0%) of the patients had >1 and ≥3 nonoperative treatments, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the type and the cost of nonoperative treatment for patients with late-stage OA. Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of nonoperative treatments at different stages of the disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Drivers of Unequal Healthcare Costs in the Nonoperative Treatment of Late-Stage Knee Osteoarthritis Prior to Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, patients with late-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) often undergo several nonoperative treatments and related procedures prior to total knee arthroplasty. The costs of these treatments and procedures are substantial, and the variation in healthcare costs among different groups of patients may exist. The purpose of this study is to examine these costs and determine the drivers of costs in patients with the highest healthcare expenditure. METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted using the IBM Watson Health MarketScan databases from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019. The primary outcome was the cost of payments for nonoperative procedures which included (i) physical therapy (PT), (ii) bracing, (iii) intra-articular injections: professional fee, hyaluronic acid (IA-HA), and corticosteroids (IA-CS), (iv) medication: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and acetaminophen, and (v) knee-specific imaging. RESULTS: Among the 24,492 patients included in the study, the total payments per patient for nonoperative care were $3,735 ± 3,049 in the highest payment quartile (Q4) and $137 ± 70 in the lowest payment quartile (Q1). Per-patient-per-month costs generally increased across quartiles for procedures. Comparing Q4 to Q1, the largest changes in prevalence were found in IA-HA (348×), bracing (10×), and PT (7×). Patients who were prescribed IA-HA and PT had a 28.3-times and 4.8-times greater likelihood, respectively, to be a higher-paying patient. CONCLUSION: Unequal healthcare costs in the nonoperative treatment of late-stage knee OA are driven by differences in prevalent management strategies. Overall healthcare expenditure may be reduced if only guideline-concordant treatments are used.

Variation in the Profit Margin for Different Types of Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: As health care shifts to a value-based model with bundled-payment methods, it is important to understand the costs and reimbursements of arthroplasty procedures that represent the largest expenditure of Medicare. The aim of the present study was to characterize the variation in (1) total hospital costs, (2) reimbursement, and (3) profit margin for different arthroplasty procedures. METHODS: The total hospital costs of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total hip arthroplasty (THA), anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), and total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) were calculated with use of time-driven activity-based costing at an orthopaedic institution from 2018 to 2020. The average reimbursement for each type of procedure was determined. Profit margin, defined as the reimbursement profit after direct costs, was calculated by deducting the average time-drive activity-based total hospital costs from the reimbursement value. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the associations between costs, reimbursement, and profit margins. RESULTS: There were 13,545 arthroplasty procedures analyzed for this study, including 6,636 TKAs, 5,902 THAs, 346 TSAs, 577 RSAs, and 84 TAAs. Costs and reimbursement were highest for TAA. THA and TKA resulted in the highest profit margins, whereas RSA resulted in the lowest. The strongest associations with profit margin were private insurance (0.46547), age (-0.22732), and implant cost (-0.19240). CONCLUSIONS: THA and TKA had greater profit margins overall than TAA and upper-extremity arthroplasty in general. Profit margins for RSA, TSA, and TAA were all at least 28% lower than those for TKA or THA. Lower-volume arthroplasty procedures were associated with decreased profit margins. Study findings suggest that optimizing implant costs and length of stay are important for sustaining institutional fiscal health when performing shoulder and ankle arthroplasty surgery.

Total Knee Arthroplasty Hospital Costs by Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing: Robotic vs Conventional.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) represents a major national health expenditure. The last decade has seen a surge in robotic-assisted TKA (roTKA); however, literature on the costs of roTKA as compared to conventional TKA (cTKA) is limited. The purpose of this study was to assess the costs associated with roTKA as compared to cTKA. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort cost-analysis study of patients undergoing primary, elective roTKA or cTKA from July 2020 to March 2021. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was used to determine granular costs. Patient demographics, medical/surgical details, and costs were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2058 TKAs were analyzed (1795 cTKAs and 263 roTKAs). roTKA patients were more often male (50.2% vs 42.3%; P = .016), and discharged home (98.5% vs 93.7%; P = .017), and had longer operating room (OR) time (144.6 vs 130.9 minutes; P < .0001), and lower length of stay (LOS) (1.8 vs 2.1 days; P < .0001). roTKA costs were 2.17× greater for supplies excluding implant (P < .0001), 1.18× for total supplies (P < .0001), 1.12× for OR personnel (P < .0001), and 1.05× for total personnel (P = .0001). Implant costs were similar (P = .076), but 0.98× cheaper for post-anesthesia care unit personnel (P = .018) and 0.84× for inpatient personnel (P < .0001). Overall hospital costs for roTKA were 1.10× more than cTKA (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: roTKA had higher total hospital costs than cTKA. Despite a lower LOS, the longer OR time with higher supply and personnel costs resulted in a costlier procedure. Understanding the costs of roTKA is essential when considering the value (ie, outcomes per dollars spent) of this modern technology.

Episode-of-Care Costs for Revision Total Joint Arthroplasties by Decadal Age Groups.

The demand for revision total joint arthroplasties (rTJAs) is expected to increase as the age of the population continues to rise. Accurate cost data regarding hospital expenses for differing age groups are needed to deliver optimal care within value-based healthcare (VBHC) models. The aim of this study was to compare the total in-hospital costs by decadal groups following rTJA and to determine the primary drivers of the costs for these procedures. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was used to capture granular hospital costs. A total of 551 rTJAs were included in the study, with 294 sexagenarians, 198 septuagenarians, and 59 octogenarians and older. Sexagenarians had a lower ASA classification (2.3 vs. 2.4 and 2.7; p < 0.0001) and were more often privately insured (66.7% vs. 24.2% and 33.9%; p < 0.0001) as compared to septuagenarians and octogenarians and older, respectively. Sexagenarians were discharged to home at a higher rate (85.3% vs. 68.3% and 34.3%; p < 0.0001), experienced a longer operating room (OR) time (199.8 min vs. 189.7 min and 172.3 min; p = 0.0195), and had a differing overall hospital length of stay (2.8 days vs. 2.7 days and 3.6 days; p = 0.0086) compared to septuagenarians and octogenarians and older, respectively. Sexagenarians had 7% and 23% less expensive personnel costs from post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) to discharge (p < 0.0001), and 1% and 24% more expensive implant costs (p = 0.077) compared to septuagenarians and octogenarians and older, respectively. Sexagenarians had a lower total in-hospital cost for rTJAs by 0.9% compared to septuagenarians but 12% more expensive total in-hospital costs compared to octogenarians and older (p = 0.185). Multivariate linear regression showed that the implant cost (0.88389; p < 0.0001), OR time (0.12140; p < 0.0001), personnel cost from PACU through to discharge (0.11472; p = 0.0007), and rTHAs (-0.03058; p < 0.0001) to be the strongest associations with overall costs. Focusing on the implant costs and OR times to reduce costs for all age groups for rTJAs is important to provide cost-effective VBHC.

Financial Burden of Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty at an Orthopedic Specialty Hospital: Higher Costs and Unequal Reimbursements.

BACKGROUND: As demand for primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) continues to grow, a proportionate increase in revision TJA (rTJA) is expected. It is essential to understand costs and reimbursement of rTJA as our country moves to bundled payment models. We aimed (1) to characterize implant and total hospital costs, (2) assess reimbursement, and (3) determine revenue for rTJA in comparison with primary TJA. METHODS: The average implant and total hospital cost of all primary and rTJA procedures by diagnosis-related group (DRG) was calculated using time-driven activity-based costing at an orthopedic hospital from 2018 to 2020. Average reimbursement and payer type were assessed by DRG. Revenue was calculated by deducting average time-driven activity-based costing total costs from reimbursement. RESULTS: 13,946 arthroplasties were included in the study. Implant cost comprised 55.8% of total hospital costs for rTJA DRG 468, compared with 43.6% of total hospital costs for primary TJA DRG 470. Total hospital costs for DRG 468 were 61.1% more than DRG 470. Reimbursement for rTJA was 1.23x more than primary TJA. Private payers paid 23.2% more than Medicare for rTJA. Margin for DRG 468 was 1.5% less than primary DRG 470. CONCLUSION: rTJA requires more hospital resources and costs than primaries, yet hospital reimbursement may be inadequate with the additional expenditures necessary to provide optimal care. If hospitals cannot perform revision services under the current reimbursement model, patient access may be limited. Implant costs are a major contributor to overall rTJA cost. Strategies are needed to reduce revision implant costs to improve value of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, economic and decision analysis.

The Cost of Hip and Knee Revision Arthroplasty by Diagnosis-Related Groups: Comparing Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing and Traditional Accounting.

BACKGROUND: Traditional hospital cost accounting (TA) has innate disadvantages that limit the ability to meaningfully measure care pathways and quality improvement. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) allows a meticulous account of costs in primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, differences between TA and TDABC have not been examined in revision hip and knee TJA (rTJA). We aimed to compare total costs of rTJA by the diagnosis-related group (DRG), measured by TDABC vs TA. METHODS: Overall costs were calculated for rTJA care cycles by DRG for 2 years of financial data (2018-2019) at our single-specialty orthopedic institution using TA and TDABC. Costs derived from TDABC, based on time and resources used, were compared with costs derived from TA based on historical costs. Proportions of implant and nonimplant costs were measured to total TA costs. RESULTS: Seven hundred ninety-three rTJAs were included in this study, with TA methodology resulting in higher cost estimates. The total cost per DRG 468, rTJA with no comorbidities or complications (CC), DRG 467, rTJA with CC, and DRG 466, rTJA with major CC, estimated by TDABC was 69%, 67%, and 49% of the estimation by TA, respectively. Implant and nonimplant costs represented different proportions between methodologies. CONCLUSION: Considerable differences exist, as TA estimations were 31%-51% higher than TDABC. The true cost is likely a value between the estimations, but TDABC presents granular and patient-specific cost data. TDABC for rTJA provides valuable bottom-up information on cost centers in the care pathway and, with targeted interventions, may lead to a more optimal delivery of value-based health care.

Differences in Hospital Costs among Octogenarians and Nonagenarians Following Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty.

The proportion of patients over the age of 90 years continues to grow, and the anticipated demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in this population is expected to rise concomitantly. As the country shifts to alternative reimbursement models, data regarding hospital expenses is needed for accurate risk-adjusted stratification. The aim of this study was to compare total in-hospital costs following primary TJA in octogenarians and nonagenarians, and to determine the primary drivers of cost. This was a retrospective analysis from a single institution in the U.S. We used time-drive activity-based costing (TDABC) to capture granular total hospital costs for each patient. 889 TJA's were included in the study, with 841 octogenarians and 48 nonagenarians. Nonagenarians were more likely to undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) (70.8% vs. 42.4%; p < 0.0001), had higher ASA classification (2.6 vs. 2.4; p = 0.049), and were more often privately insured (35.4% vs. 27.8%; p = 0.0001) as compared to octogenarians. Nonagenarians were more often discharged to skilled nursing facilities (56.2% vs. 37.5%; p = 0.0011), experienced longer operating room (OR) time (142 vs. 133; p = 0.0201) and length of stay (3.7 vs. 3.1; p = 0.0003), and had higher implant and total in-hospital costs (p < 0.0001 and 0.0001). Multivariate linear regression showed implant cost (0.700; p < 0.0001), length of stay (0.546; p < 0.0001), and OR time (0.288; p < 0.0001) to be the strongest associations with overall costs. Primary TJA for nonagenarians was more expensive than octogenarians. Targeting implant costs, length of stay, and OR time can reduce costs for nonagenarians in order to provide cost-effective value-based care.

Reference Pricing Reduces Total Knee Implant Costs.

BACKGROUND: Reference pricing establishes a set price a hospital is willing to pay for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) components regardless of vendor. The hospital contracts with vendors that sell implants to the hospital at the hospital-dictated prices. Orthopedic surgeons are free to utilize any implant system that has met the reference price using their best clinical judgment. Our hypothesis is that vendors will meet the set price and selection of different vendors and technologies will not change. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the 12 months prior (May 2017-2018) and the most recent 12 months after (March 2019-2020) implementing reference pricing at our institution. We investigated differences in average prices for total implant and component costs. We evaluated cost of implants with respect to surgeon volume, assessed the rate of cementless TKAs used, and number of companies purchased from before and after reference pricing. RESULTS: In total, 7148 TKAs were included in the study with 3790 arthroplasties before and 3358 after implementation of reference pricing. Overall implant costs decreased by 16.7% (P < .0001). All individual knee component costs decreased by at least 11% (P = .0003). No difference in prices were found among surgeons (P = .9758). Cementless knee use increased by 9% (P < .0001; odds ratio 1.94, 95% confidence interval = 1.69-2.24). No vendor business was lost. CONCLUSION: The strategy of reference pricing significantly reduced costs for TKA implants at our institution. The reduction in implant costs was regardless of surgeon volume. Newer technologies were utilized more often after reference pricing. This strategy represents a significant cost-savings approach for other hospitals.

Pinnacle Ultamet metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty survivorship: average 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether a connection exists between femoral head size, offset, neck length, and cup abduction angles, and rate of revision in metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) implant systems. METHODS: A retrospective review of MoM THA completed by a single surgeon with a single implant between 2003 and 2008 was conducted. Patient demographics, implant data, radiographs, and revision details were collected at follow-up. Incidence rates for revision and osteolysis were calculated in regard to the femoral head size, stem offset, neck length, and cup abduction angles. RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety two THAs were identified, with 79% of patients returning for a median follow-up of 10.3 years (interquartile range = 6.0-12.3). The median time to revision was 7.5 years (interquartile range = 5.3-9.9) among 27 total revision surgeries. The overall incidence rate of revision was 5.4 revisions per 1000 person-years, 3.0 revisions per 1000 person-years for adverse local tissue reaction. Hips with a cup abduction angle of ≤40° had revisions at nearly twice the rate of those with an angle of 41°-50° (incidence rate ratio = 1.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.92, 4.29). Hips with a 9 mm neck length had an increased rate of revision (incidence rate ratio = 5.94, 95% confidence interval: 1.33, 26.55) relative to those with a neck length of 0 mm. Rates of osteolysis were similar between implants of different head sizes, neck lengths and cup abduction angles. CONCLUSIONS: MoM implant systems with longer necks and smaller cup abduction angles may lead to increased need for revision. Results from this study suggest a need for closer long-term follow-up of MoM THA systems.

Coinfection of HIV and hepatitis C increases complication rates after total joint arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: As advances in efficacy of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis-C virus (HCV) anti-viral medications increase, patients are able to maintain higher quality of lives than ever before. While these patients live longer lives, the unique patient population of those co-infected with both HIV and HCV increases. As these older patients seek orthopaedic care, it is important to understand their unique outcome profile. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the complication rate after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in patients with HIV and HCV coinfection compared with patients with HIV or HCV only. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) at our urban, academic hospital between April 2016 and April 2019 was conducted. Patients were stratified into three groups according to viral status: HIV only, HCV only, or HIV and HCV coinfection. Baseline demographics, intravenous drug (IV) use, surgery type, CD4+ count, follow-up and complications were analysed. RESULTS: Of the 133 patients included in the study, 28 had HIV, 88 had HCV and 17 were coinfected with both HIV and HCV. Coinfected patients were more likely to have a lower BMI (p < 0.039) and a history of IV drug use (p < 0.018) compared to patients with either HIV or HCV only. Coinfected patients had a higher complication rate (41%) than both HIV only (7%; p < 0.001) and HCV only (12.5%; p < 0.001) patients. DISCUSSION: Patients coinfected with HIV and HCV undergoing TJA have a higher complication rate than patients with either infection alone. As this unique population of coinfected patients continues to expand, increasingly they will be under the care of arthroplasty surgeons. Improved awareness and understanding of the baseline demographic differences between these patients is paramount. Recognition of the increased complication rates grants the opportunity to improve their orthopaedic care through preoperative and multidisciplinary management.

Variation in the Cost of Care for Different Types of Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Lower-extremity arthroplasty constitutes the largest burden on health-care spending of any Medicare diagnosis group. Demand for upper extremity arthroplasty also continues to rise. It is necessary to better understand costs as health care shifts toward a bundled-payment accounting approach. We aimed (1) to identify whether variation exists in total cost for different types of joint arthroplasty, and, if so, (2) to determine which cost parameters drive this variation. METHODS: The cost of the episode of inpatient care for 22,215 total joint arthroplasties was calculated by implementing time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) at a single orthopaedic specialty hospital from 2015 to 2018. Implant price, supply costs, personnel costs, and length of stay for total knee, total hip, anatomic total shoulder, reverse total shoulder, total elbow, and total ankle arthroplasty were analyzed. Individual cost parameters were compared with total cost and volume. RESULTS: Higher implant cost appeared to correlate with higher total costs and represented 53.8% of the total cost for an inpatient care cycle. Total knee arthroplasty was the least-expensive and highest-volume procedure, whereas total elbow arthroplasty had the lowest volume and highest cost (1.65 times more than that of total knee arthroplasty). Length of stay was correlated with increased personnel cost but did not have a significant effect on total cost. CONCLUSIONS: Total inpatient cost at our orthopaedic specialty hospital varied by up to a factor of 1.65 between different fields of arthroplasty. The highest-volume procedures-total knee and hip arthroplasty-were the least expensive, driven predominantly by lower implant purchase prices. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We are not aware of any previous studies that have accurately compared cost structures across upper and lower-extremity arthroplasty with a uniform methodology. The present study, because of its uniform accounting process, provides reliable data that will allow clinicians to better understand cost relationships between different procedures.

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Femoral Nerve Block With Intraoperative Local Anesthetic Injection of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may impact long-term results and incidence of complications. Femoral nerve block (FNB) provides excellent pain relief after TKA, although associated risks include weakness, delayed participation in therapy, and nerve injury. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a potentially longer acting local anesthetic that may reduce postoperative pain. METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 373 TKA patients randomized to receive either an FNB (control group), or an intraoperative periarticular injection (PAI) with LB and a placebo saline FNB (experimental group). Patients were evaluated with visual analog scores for pain, range of motion, performance of straight leg raise (SLR), walking distance, and Short Form-12 up to 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Twelve and 24 hours postoperatively, the control group had significantly lower pain scores (mean 3.24 vs 3.87; P = .02) and higher range of motion (84.54° vs 78°; P < .001). The patients receiving LB PAI were significantly more likely to perform a straight leg raise 12 hours postoperatively (73% vs 50%; P = .0003). Patients in the LB (experimental) group scored better in the physical function component of the Short Form-12 (-23 vs -27, P = .01) 3 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: While pain scores were slightly lower in the control group in the first 24 hours after TKA compared with LB PAI, the magnitude of the difference was small, and excellent pain relief was provided by both interventions. Use of LB PAI in TKA is a reasonable alternative to FNB, which avoids the additional weakness and other risk associated with FNB procedures.

Oral Tranexamic Acid Reduces Transfusions in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces intraoperative blood loss and transfusions in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Although numerous studies demonstrate the efficacy of intravenous and topical TXA in these patients, few demonstrate the effectiveness and appropriate dosing recommendations of oral formulations. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate differences in transfusion requirements in patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty with either no TXA (n = 866), a single-dose of oral TXA (n = 157), or both preoperative and postoperative oral TXA (n = 1049). Secondary outcomes included postoperative hemoglobin drop, total units transfused, length of stay, drain output, and cell salvage volume. RESULTS: Transfusion rates decreased from 15.4% in the no-oral tranexamic acid (OTA) group to 9.6% in the single-dose OTA group (P < .001) and 7% in the 2-dose group (P < .001), with no difference in transfusion rates between the single- and 2-dose groups (P = .390). In addition, postoperative hemoglobin drop was reduced from 4.2 g/dL in the no-OTA group to 3.5 g/dL in the single-dose group (P < .01) and to 3.4 g/dL in the 2-dose group (P < .01), without a difference between the single- and 2-dose groups (P = .233). CONCLUSION: OTA reduces transfusions, with greater ease of administration and improved cost-effectiveness relative to other forms of delivery.

Low dose compared to variable dose Warfarin and to Fondaparinux as prophylaxis for thromboembolism after elective hip or knee replacement surgery; a randomized, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary emboli (PE), known together as venous thromboembolic (VTE) disease remain major complications following elective hip and knee surgery. This study compares three chemoprophylactic regimens for VTE following elective primary unilateral hip or knee replacement, one of which was designed to minimize risk of post-operative bleeding. METHODS: Patients were randomized and stratified for hip vs. knee to receive A: variable dose warfarin (first dose on the night preceding surgery with subsequent target INR 2.0-2.5), B: 2.5 mg fondaparinux daily starting 6-18 h postoperatively, or C: fixed 1.0 mg dose warfarin daily starting 7 days preoperatively. All treatments continued until bilateral leg venous ultrasound day 28 ± 2 or earlier upon a VTE event. The study examined primary endpoints including leg DVT, PE or death due to VTE and secondary endpoints including effects on D-dimer, estimated blood loss (EBL) at surgery and hemorrhagic complications. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-five patients were randomized. None was lost to follow-up. Taking 1.0 mg warfarin for seven days preoperatively did not prolong the prothrombin time (PT). Two patients in Arm C had asymptomatic distal DVT. One major bleed occurred in Arm B and one in Arm C (ischemic colitis). Elevated d-dimer did not predict delayed VTE for one year. CONCLUSIONS: Fixed low dose warfarin started preoperatively is equivalent to two other standards of care under study (95 % CI: -0.0428, 0.0067 for both) as VTE prophylaxis for the patients having elective major joint replacement surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier # NCT00767559 FDA IND: 103,716.

Patients' views on surgeons' financial conflicts of interest.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Justice's investigations into financial relationships between surgical device manufacturers and orthopaedic surgeons have raised the question as to whether surgeons can continue to collaborate with industry and maintain public trust. We explored postoperative patients' views on financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers, their views on disclosure as a method to manage these relationships, and their opinions on oversight. METHODS: From November 2010 to March 2011, we surveyed 251 postoperative patients in the U.S. (an 88% response rate) and 252 postoperative patients in Canada (a 92% response rate) in follow-up hip and knee arthroplasty clinics with use of self-administered questionnaires. Patients were eligible to complete the questionnaire if their surgery (primary or revision hip or knee arthroplasty) had occurred at least three months earlier. RESULTS: Few patients are worried about possible financial relationships between their surgeon and industry (6% of surveyed patients in the U.S. and 6% of surveyed patients in Canada). Most patients thought that it is appropriate for surgeons to receive payments from manufacturers for activities that can benefit patients, such as royalties for inventions (U.S., 69%; Canada, 66%) and consultancy (U.S., 48%; Canada, 53%). Most patients felt that it is not appropriate for their surgeon to receive gifts from industry (U.S., 63%; Canada, 59%). A majority felt that their surgeon would hold patients' interests paramount, regardless of any financial relationship with a manufacturer (U.S., 76%; Canada, 74%). A majority of patients wanted their surgeon's professional organization to ensure that financial relationships are appropriate (U.S., 83%; Canada, 83%); a minority endorsed government oversight of these relationships (U.S., 26%; Canada, 35%). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients are not worried about possible financial relationships between their surgeon and industry. They clearly distinguish financial relationships that benefit current or future patients from those that benefit the surgeon or device manufacturer. They favor disclosure with professional oversight as a method of managing financial relationships between surgeons and manufacturers.