Time-Driven, Activity-Based Costing of Presurgical Infant Orthopedics: A Critical Component of Establishing Value of Latham Appliance and Nasoalveolar Molding.

BACKGROUND: Value-based health-care reform requires assessment of outcomes and costs of medical interventions. In cleft care, presurgical infant orthopedics is still being evaluated for clinical benefits and risks; however, the cost of these procedures has been largely ignored. This study uses robust accounting methods to quantify the cost of providing two types of presurgical infant orthopedics: Latham appliance treatment and nasoalveolar molding. METHODS: This is a prospective study of patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate who underwent treatment with presurgical infant orthopedics from 2017 to 2019 at two academic centers. Costs were measured using time-driven activity-based costing. Personnel costs, facility costs (operating room, clinic, and inpatient ward), and equipment costs were included. Travel expenses were incorporated as an estimate of direct costs borne by the family, but indirect costs (e.g., time off from work) were not considered. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated with Latham appliance treatment and 14 were treated with nasoalveolar molding. For Latham appliance treatment, average total cost was $7553 per patient ($1041 for personnel, $637 for equipment, $4871 for facility, and $1004 for travel over 6.5 visits). Unilateral and bilateral costs were $6891 and $8860, respectively. For nasoalveolar molding, average cost totaled $2541 ($364 for personnel, $151 for equipment, $300 for facility, and $1726 for travel over 13 visits); $2120 for unilateral and $3048 for bilateral treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The major difference in cost is attributable to operative placement of the Latham device. Travel cost for nasoalveolar molding is often higher because of frequent clinical encounters required. Future investigation should focus on whether outcomes achieved by presurgical infant orthopedics justify the $2100 to $8900 expenditure for these adjunctive procedures.

Hidden Costs in Resident Training: Financial Cohort Analysis of First Assistants in Reduction Mammaplasty.

Graduate medical education (GME) programs are vital to developing future plastic surgeons. However, their cost-efficiency has yet to be contextualized. This cohort quality improvement (QI) project aimed to measure the indirect costs an institution assumes in training surgical residents, by comparing the differences in operative time and procedural charges between a resident and a physician assistant (PA) first-assisting during adolescent reduction mammaplasty. METHODS: From 2013 to 2019, adolescent bilateral reduction mammaplasty procedures first-assisted by either a resident or physician assistant were considered for analysis. Financial data, including all hospital and physician expenditures and operation duration, patient demographics, and outcomes data were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: A total of 49 reduction mammaplasty cases were included for analysis. Residents had an average of 5.9 ± 1.5 years of post-graduate surgical training, whereas the PA had 2 years of surgical experience. Procedures first-assisted by a surgical resident took a mean/median of 34 minutes longer and were $3750 more expensive, respectively, than cases first-assisted by a PA (P < 0.01, both). CONCLUSIONS: Reduction mammaplasty procedures were longer and accrued higher charges when first-assisted by a surgical resident than by a PA. Although Graduate Medical Education programs are necessary to train the next generation of surgeons, they may result in unintended opportunity costs for teaching hospitals. Federal support to academic medical centers aims to cushion the cost of residential training, but is insufficient to compensate for resident inefficiency. Hospitals may consider incorporating PAs into the Graduate Medical Education paradigm to alleviate administrative burden, lower operational charges, and enhance resident training curricula.

Optimal Outcomes Reporting (OOR): A New Value-Based Metric for Outcome Reporting Following Cleft Palate Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Palatoplasty outcome measurements vary widely among institutions. A standardized outcome metric would help provide quality benchmarks. DESIGN: Retrospective review of primary palatoplasty patients from 2007 to 2013. SETTING: Tertiary care children's hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We created a novel conceptual quality metric called "OOR" (Optimal Outcome Reporting). Optimal Outcome Reporting is designed to reflect the percentage of patients with cleft palate who experience the best outcomes: one operation, velar competence by age 5 years, and no unintended palatal fistula. RESULTS: Optimal Outcome Reporting was 72.3% (68/94). Eight patients had "suboptimal" outcomes for having undergone more than one operation. Eighteen patients failed for velar incompetence. No additional patients fell out of the algorithm for fistula. A significantly higher proportion of nonsyndromic patients demonstrated an "optimal" result compared to syndromic patients (61/80, 76.3% vs 7/14, 50.0%; P = .04). Patients who required more than one procedure had significantly more clinic visits (32.6 vs 14.9; P < .01) and accrued higher costs compared to "optimal" patients (US$34 019.88 vs US$15 357.25; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Optimal Outcome Reporting represents a novel quality metric that can provide meaningful information for patients with cleft palate. Optimal Outcome Reporting utilization can help cleft centers adopt changes that matter to patients and their families. By allowing for cross-institutional comparisons in a clear and objective manner, OOR can promote competition, innovation, and value in cleft palate care.

Utilizing a Physician Scribe in a Pediatric Plastic Surgical Practice: A Time-driven Activity-based Costing Study.

BACKGROUND: To use time-driven activity-based costing methodology to compare the costs of routine pediatric plastic surgical patient visits with and without a physician scribe. METHODS: Pediatric plastic surgical clinic visits at a tertiary care facility with the following diagnoses were studied: skin lacerations, skin lesions, and plagiocephaly. Two plastic surgeons saw patients individually either with or without a scribe over a 10-month period. The time that the scribe and physician spent on the patient was recorded, including the duration of the clinic visit and time spent creating, dictating, reviewing, and signing the note. An average appointment activity time for each measurement component was produced, and a capacity cost rate was introduced to derive the cost per minute for a scribe and physician. Sensitivity analysis and paired t-test were conducted to analyze the results. RESULTS: A total of 45 cases with a physician scribe were observed with an average appointment activity time of 12.83 minutes (4.97 min for the scribe, 0.92 min for the physician, and 6.95 min combined). A total of 72 cases without a physician scribe were observed with an average appointment activity time of 12.01 minutes. The total attributable cost saving per appointment was $13.82 when a physician scribe was utilized. CONCLUSION: Time-driven activity-based costing methodology showed that the use of a physician scribe reduced cost per office visit by substituting physician time for a less expensive resource.

Is It Cost Effective to Add an Intraoral Scanner to an Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Practice?

PURPOSE: Intraoral scanners (IOSs), which create digital "impressions" of dental arches, have become popular for prosthetic and orthodontic applications. Adoption in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) practices has been slower, likely because of high implementation costs and low-volume use. The purpose of this study was to evaluate costs for introduction of an IOS into an OMS practice. The authors hypothesized that digital impressions would be more efficient in time and cost compared with conventional impressions and that implementation costs would be offset within 1 year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study that included patients who had digital impressions during the first year after introduction of an IOS to the practice. Conventional alginate impressions obtained at the same visit were included for comparison. Variables included time for each step in each impression process, IOS experience of the operator obtaining the impression, and associated costs. Per-arch costs for each technique were calculated using time-driven activity-based costing methodology. RESULTS: Sixty-three digital impressions and 31 conventional impressions were included. Mean total times for digital and conventional impressions were 14.1 ± 1.3 and 19.4 ± 4.0 minutes per arch, respectively. On a per-patient basis (2 arches for digital impressions and 4 arches for conventional impressions because of the inability to create duplicate stone models from each alginate impression), total impression times were 24.8 ± 2.7 minutes for digital and 67.2 ± 14.8 minutes for conventional impressions. Total calculated costs for digital and conventional impressions were $21.42 and $29.40 per arch and $37.66 and $102.10 per patient, respectively. In a practice with 2 patients for impressions per working day (500 per year), it would take 1.04 years to offset the purchase of the IOS; with 5 sets of impressions per day (1,250 per year), it would take 5 months. CONCLUSION: Digital impressions are more efficient and cost effective than standard impressions, and implementation costs can be offset within the first year.

Factors Associated With Late Surgical Cancellations in Pediatric Plastic and Oral Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical cancellations that occur within 1 day of the procedure (ie, late cancellations) disrupt the efficiency of the operating room. The aim of the present study was to identify the factors associated with late cancellations in a tertiary pediatric surgical practice. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of patients treated by plastic and oral surgery services at our institution from 2010 to 2015. We collected data pertaining to the timing and reasons for cancellation. Reasons for cancellation were retrospectively classified by the investigators as either "preventable," "possibly preventable," "unpreventable," or "undocumented." We also measured the frequency of cancellations based on type of surgery. RESULTS: Of 10,730 scheduled operating room cases, 444 (4.1%) were cancelled within 24 hours of the procedure. Sixty-seven percent (297/444 cases) were cancelled on the same day as the planned procedure, and the remaining cases were cancelled the day prior after 1 PM. Forty-two percent of cancellations were deemed preventable, and 45.3% of cases were deemed possibly preventable. The majority of procedures were cancelled because of illness (44%), inadequate fasting (9%), and parental inconvenience (7%). The highest frequency of cancellation was found in skin lesion (36%) followed by dentoalveolar (14%) and cleft lip and palate (12%) cases. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, most late surgical cancellations were preventable or possibly preventable. The timing of the cancellation is important because those that occur near the scheduled procedure time disallow adequate and timely redistribution of operating room resources and personnel. Analyzing and addressing the preventable and possibly preventable causes outlined in this study will significantly improve efficiency and patient access.