Catastrophic Health Care Expenditure Following Brachial Plexus Injury.

PURPOSE: Brachial plexus injuries (BPIs) are devastating to patients not only functionally but also financially. Like patients experiencing other traumatic injuries and unexpected medical events, patients with BPIs are at risk of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in which out-of-pocket health spending exceeds 40% of postsubsistence income (income remaining after food and housing expenses). The individual financial strain after BPIs has not been previously quantified. The purpose of this study was to assess the proportion of patients with BPIs who experience risk of CHE after reconstructive surgery. METHODS: Administrative databases were used from 8 states to identify patients who underwent surgery for BPIs. Demographics including age, sex, race, and insurance payer type were obtained. Inpatient billing records were used to determine the total surgical and inpatient facility costs within 90 days after the initial surgery. Due to data constraints, further analysis was only conducted for privately-insured patients. The proportion of patients with BPIs at risk of CHE was recorded. Predictors of CHE risk were determined from a multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 681 privately-insured patients undergoing surgery for BPIs, nearly one-third (216 [32%]) were at risk of CHE. Black race and patients aged between 25 and 39 years were significant risk factors associated with CHE. Sex and the number of comorbidities were not associated with risk of CHE. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of privately-insured patients met the threshold for being at risk of CHE after BPI surgery. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Identifying those patients at risk of CHE can inform strategies to minimize long-term financial distress after BPIs, including detailed counseling regarding anticipated health care expenditures and efforts to optimize access to appropriate insurance policies for patients with BPIs.

The management of clenched fist injuries with local anaesthesia and field sterility.

Clenched fist injury is associated with a high risk of infectious complications and is commonly managed with formal irrigation and debridement in the operating theatre. The purpose of this study was to determine outcomes associated with irrigation and debridement of clenched fist injuries under local anaesthesia using field sterility outside the operative theatre. In this single centre study, 232 patients were identified with clenched fist injury and 210 were treated with a standard protocol beginning with administration of intravenous antibiotics and then irrigation and debridement at the bedside. Primary outcome measures were the need for repeat debridement and complications. Secondary outcome measures included factors associated with the need for repeat debridement. Fifteen of the 210 patients (7%) required repeat debridement. Patients with cultures positive for gram-negative organisms had a significantly increased risk of repeat debridement. Irrigation and debridement under local anaesthesia using field sterility results in an acceptably low risk of complications or need for repeat debridement.Level of evidence: IV.

Proximal Row Carpectomy Versus 4-Corner Fusion: Incidence, Conversion to Fusion, and Cost.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to compare incidence, demographic trends, and rates of subsequent fusion between proximal row carpectomy (PRC) and 4-corner fusion (4CF) among patients in the United States. METHODS: A total of 3,636 patients who underwent PRC and 5,047 who underwent 4CF were identified from the years 2005 through 2014 among enrollees in the PearlDiver database. Regional distribution, demographic characteristics, annual incidence, comorbidities, and subsequent wrist fusion were compared between the 2 groups. Of the patients identified, 3,512 from each group were age- and sex-matched and subsequently compared for rates of converted fusion, 30- and 90-day readmission rates, and average direct cost. RESULTS: Patients undergoing 4CF and PRC did not have statistically significant differences in comorbidities. The incidence of the procedures among all subscribers increased for both PRC (1.8 per 10,000 to 2.6 per 10,000) and 4CF (1.2 per 10,000 to 2.0 per 10,000) from 2005 to 2014. Comparing the matched cohorts, patients who underwent 4CF had a higher rate of subsequent fusion than those who underwent PRC (2.67% vs 1.79%). Readmission rates were not significantly different at 30 or 90 days. Average direct cost was significantly greater for 4CF than for PRC. CONCLUSIONS: Both PRC and 4CF have been utilized at increasing rates in the past decade. Wrist fusion rates and average costs are higher in the 4CF group without a significant difference in readmission rates. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.

Epidemiological and Treatment Trends of Distal Radius Fractures across Multiple Age Groups.

Background The purpose of this study is to assess the epidemiology, population-specific treatment trends, and complications of distal radius fractures in the United States. Methods The PearlDiver database (Humana [2007-2014], Medicare [2005-2014]) was used to access US inpatient and outpatient data for all patients who had undergone operative and nonoperative treatment for a distal radius fracture in the United States. Epidemiologic analysis was performed followed by age-based stratification, to assess prevalence, treatment trends, and rates of complications. Results A total of 1,124,060 distal radius treatment claims were captured. The incidence of distal radius fractures follows a bimodal distribution with distinct peaks in the pediatric and elderly population. Fractures in the pediatric population occurred predominately in males, whereas fractures in the elderly population occurred more frequently in females. The most commonly used modality of treatment was nonoperative; however, the use of internal fixation increased significantly during the study period, from 8.75 to 20.02%, with a corresponding decrease in percutaneous fixation. The overall complication rate was 8.3%, with mechanical symptoms most frequently reported. Conclusions The last decade has seen a significant increase in the use of internal fixation as treatment modality for distal radius fractures. The impetus for this change is likely multifactorial and partly related to recent innovations including volar locking plates and an increasingly active elderly population. The implicated financial cost must be weighed against the productivity cost of maintaining independent living to determine the true burden to the healthcare system.

Are Low Patient Satisfaction Scores Always Due to the Provider?: Determinants of Patient Satisfaction Scores During Spine Clinic Visits.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of various components on patient satisfaction scores SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Patient satisfaction has become an important component of quality assessments. However, with many of these sources collecting satisfaction data reluctant to disclose detailed information, little remains known about the potential determinants of patient satisfaction. METHODS: Two hundred patients were contacted via phone within 3 weeks of new patient encounter with 11 spine providers. Standardized patient satisfaction phone survey consisting of 25 questions (1-10 rating scale) was administered. Questions inquired about scheduling, parking, office staff, teamwork, wait-time, radiology, provider interactions/behavior, treatment, and follow-up communication. Potential associations between these factors and three main outcome measures were investigated: (1) provider satisfaction, (2) overall clinic visit satisfaction, and (3) quality of care. RESULTS: Significant associations (P < 0.0001) with provider satisfaction, overall clinic visit satisfaction, and perceived overall quality of care were found with appointment scheduling, parking, office staff, teamwork, wait time, radiology, provider interactions/behavior, treatment, and follow-up communication. Nurse-practitioner/resident involvement was positively associated with scores (P ≤ 0.03). A "candy-man" effect was not noted, as pain medication prescribing did not play a significant role in satisfaction (P > 0.05).In multivariate regression analysis, explanation of medical condition/treatment (P = 0.002) and provider empathy (P = 0.04) were significantly associated with provider satisfaction scores, while the amount of time spent with the provider was not. Conversely, teamwork of staff/provider and follow-up communication were significantly associated with both overall clinic visit satisfaction and quality of care (P ≤ 0.03), while provider behaviors or satisfaction were not. CONCLUSION: Satisfaction with the provider was associated with better explanations of the spine condition/treatment plan and provider empathy, but was not a significant factor in either overall clinic visit satisfaction or perceived quality of care. Patients' perception of teamwork between staff and providers along with reliable follow-up communication were found to be significant determinants of overall patient satisfaction and perceived quality of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Impact of Discharge Disposition on 30-Day Readmissions Following Elective Spine Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Readmissions are a significant economic burden on the health care system and increasingly being utilized as a metric of quality. Patients discharged to home vs an inpatient facility have different characteristics, which might influence the readmissions following spine surgery. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of discharge disposition on readmission rates and causes of readmission after spine surgery. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a prospective registry and undergoing elective spine surgery were analyzed. Readmissions (30 d), demographic, clinical variables, and baseline patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Patients were dichotomized as discharged home vs inpatient facility. RESULTS: Of total 1631 patients, 1444 (89%) patients were discharged home and 187 (11%) discharged to an inpatient facility. Sixty-five (4%) patients were readmitted at 30 d. There was no significant difference in readmissions between patients discharged to a facility 10 (5%) vs home 55 (4%; P = .210). In a multivariable analysis, adjusting for all the comorbidities, the discharge destination was not associated with readmission within 30 d. The medical complications (80%) were the most common cause of readmission in those discharged to a facility. Patients discharged home had significantly higher readmissions related to surgical wound issues (67%; P = .034). CONCLUSION: Despite the older age and higher comorbidities in patients discharged to an inpatient facility, the proportion of readmissions was comparable to those discharged home. Patients discharged home had a higher proportion of readmissions related to surgical wound complications and those discharged to facility had higher readmissions associated with medical complications. Understanding causes of readmission based on discharge destination may allow targeted intervention to reduce the readmission rates following spine surgery.

Impact of old age on patient-report outcomes and cost utility for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery for degenerative spine disease.

PURPOSE: With growing older population and increasing rates of cervical spinal surgery, it is vital to understand the value of cervical surgery in this population. We set forth to determine the cost utility following anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative disease in older patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing ACDF for degenerative diseases were enrolled into prospective longitudinal registry. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year postoperatively. Two-year medical resource utilization, missed work, and health-state values [quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] were assessed to compute cost per QALY gained. Patients were dichotomized based on age: <65 years (younger) and ≥65 years (older) to compare the cost utility in these age groups. RESULTS: Total 218 (87%) younger patients and 33 (13%) older patients who underwent ACDF were analyzed. Both the groups demonstrated a significant improvement in PROs 2-year following surgery. The older patients had a lower mean cumulative gain in QALYs compared to younger patients at 1 year (0.141 vs. 0.28, P = 0.05) and 2 years (0.211 vs. 0.424, P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the mean total 2-year cost between older [$21,041 (95% CI $18,466-$23,616)] and younger [$22,669 (95% CI $$21,259-$24,079)] patients (P = 0.27). Two-year cost per QALY gained in older vs. younger patients was ($99,720/QALYs gained vs. ($53,464/QALYs gained, P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: ACDF surgery provided a significant gain in health-state utility in older patients with degenerative cervical pathology, with a mean cumulative 2-year cost per QALY gained of $99,720/QALY. While older patients have a slightly higher cost utility compared to their younger counterparts, surgery in the older cohort does provide a significant improvement in pain, disability, and quality-of-life outcomes.

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.

Preoperative and surgical factors associated with postoperative intensive care unit admission following operative treatment for degenerative lumbar spine disease.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the factors associated with postoperative ICU admission in patients undergoing surgical management of degenerative lumbar spine disease. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease were enrolled into a prospective registry over a 2-year period. Preoperative variables (age, gender, ASA grade, ODI%, CAD, HTN, MI, CHF, DM, BMI, depression, anxiety) and surgical variables (instrumentation, arthrodesis, estimated blood loss, length of surgery) were collected prospectively. Postoperative ICU admission details were retrospectively determined from the electronic medical record. Student's t test (continuous variables) and Chi-square test (categorical variables) were used to determine the association of each preoperative and surgical variable with ICU admission. RESULTS: 808 Patients (273 laminectomy, 535 laminectomy and fusion) were evaluated. Forty-one (5.1%) patients were found to have postoperative ICU admissions. Reasons for admission included blood loss (12.2%), cardiac (29.3%), respiratory (19.5%), neurologic (31.7%), and other (7.3%). For preoperative variables, female gender (P < 0.001), history of CAD (P = 0.003), history of MI (P = 0.008), history of CHF (P = 0.001), age (P = 0.025), and ASA grade (P = 0.008) were significantly associated with ICU admission. For surgical variables, estimated blood loss (P < 0.001) and length of surgery (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: Age, female gender, ASA grade, cardiac comorbidities, intraoperative blood loss, and length of surgery were associated with increased risk of postoperative ICU admission. Knowledge of these factors can aid surgeons in patient selection and preoperative discussion with patients about potential need for unexpected admission to the ICU.

What Patient Characteristics Could Potentially Affect Patient Satisfaction Scores During Spine Clinic?

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. OBJECTIVE: Assess which patient factors are associated with patient satisfaction scores in the outpatient spine clinic setting. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient satisfaction has become an important component of quality assessments, and thereby pay-for-performance metrics, made by government, hospitals, and insurance providers. METHODS: During a 7-month period, 200 patients were contacted via phone within 3 weeks of a new patient encounter with 1 of 11 spine providers. A standardized patient satisfaction phone survey consisting of 25 questions, answered using a 1-10 scale, was then administered. Patient demographics, medical/social history, and previous treatment were prospectively recorded. Potential associations between these patient factors and 3 outcomes of interest were investigated: (1) provider satisfaction, (2) overall clinic visit satisfaction, and (3) overall quality of care during clinic visit. RESULTS: Younger age, less formal education, and smoking were associated with diminished provider satisfaction, overall clinic visit satisfaction, and perceived overall quality of care (P ≤ 0.0001). Male patients were significantly less satisfied with their clinic visit compared with females (P = 0.029). Those treated under a worker's compensation claim were significantly less satisfied with their provider and overall quality of care (P ≤ 0.02). Marital status, working status, mental health history, travel distance, pain characteristics, previous treatments, and current narcotic use were not significant determinants of patient satisfaction (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study found that those patients who were younger, with less formal education, and active smokers had lower patient satisfaction scores. Because patient satisfaction is increasingly being used in assessments of quality of care, it is essential that these factors be considered when evaluating a given provider's practice. This information is important to providers by helping guide individualized patient interactions while in clinic, as well as, the various agencies collecting satisfaction scores allowing them to account for potential sampling bias. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Incidence and reasons for hardware removal following operative fixation of distal radius fractures.

PURPOSE: To determine the incidence and reasons for hardware removal after operative fixation of distal radius fractures. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 33 patients who underwent removal of a volar distal radius plate from 2007 to 2013. We recorded the primary reason for plate removal, patient sex, body mass index, AO fracture type, and plate manufacturer. The total number of both distal radius plating procedures and implant removals was analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 33 patients who underwent implant removal, the most common reasons for removal were pain (30%), tenosynovitis (27%), malunion (24%), infection (12%), nonunion (6%), and tendon rupture (3%). The most common AO fracture types requiring plate removal were A2, C2, and C3 (7 each). A total of 517 distal radius fractures received plate fixation at our institution from 2007 to 2009, a number that rose to 610 from 2010 to 2012. The number of distal radius plate removals over that same time was relatively constant at 17 and 16, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We advise continued review of reasons for implant removal to limit future hardware complications related to volar plating of distal radius fractures. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

How often are interfacility transfers of spine injury patients truly necessary?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Traumatic spine injuries are often transferred to regional tertiary trauma centers from outside hospitals (OSHs) and subsequently discharged from the trauma center's emergency department (ED) suggesting secondary overtriage of such injuries. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate the definitive treatment and disposition of traumatic spine injuries transferred from OSH, particularly those without other trauma injuries or neurologic symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Adult patients presenting to a single Level 1 trauma center with spine injuries were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures considered in the study were appropriateness of transfer, treatment, and cost. METHODS: Four thousand five-hundred consecutive adult patients presenting to a single Level 1 trauma center with spine injuries (isolated or polytrauma) were reviewed. This consisted of 1,427 patients (32%) transferred from an OSH ED. All OSH, emergency medical services, and receiving institution (RI) patient records and imaging were reviewed. RESULTS: Patients who were neurologically intact, nonpolytrauma, and without critical medical issues at the OSH (isolated intact spine transfers) comprised 29% of transfers. Helicopters transported 13% of these patients. The most frequent injuries were compression (26%), burst (17%), and transverse process (10%) fractures. Seventy-eight percent were discharged directly from the RI's ED. Similarly, 15% were not given any formal treatment, 13% had surgery, and 72% given orthosis treatment. The average cost for transportation and ED costs for those discharged from the RI ED were $1,863 and $12,895, respectively. Of the isolated intact spine transfers, 42% were considered to be inappropriate to warrant transfer. This was defined as those sent from an OSH with an orthopedic or neurosurgeon on staff and clearly stable injuries with minimal chance of progressing to instability. Isolated intact spine transfers whose OSH spine imaging was not considered unstable was 25% of transfers with a helicopter used to transport 14% of these patients. Eighty-seven percent were discharged from the ED, whereas only 3% went onto surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to investigate interfacility transfers with spine injuries and found high rate of secondary overtriage of neurologically intact patients with isolated spine injuries. Potential solutions include increasing spine coverage in community EDs, increasing direct communication between the OSH and the spine specialist at the tertiary center, and utilization of teleradiology.

Repeat spine imaging in transferred emergency department patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: Assess frequency of repeat spine imaging in patients transferred with known spine injuries from outside hospital (OSH) to tertiary receiving institution (RI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Unnecessary repeat imaging after transfer has started to become a recognized problem with the obvious issues related to repeat imaging along with potential for iatrogenic injury with movement of patients with spine problems. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients presenting to a single 1-level trauma center with spine injuries during a 51-month period were reviewed (n = 4500), resulting in 1427 patients transferred from OSH emergency department. All imaging and radiology reports from the OSH were reviewed, as well as studies performed at RI. A repeat was the same imaging modality used on the same spine region as OSH imaging. RESULTS: The overall rate of repeat spine imaging for both OSH imaging sent and not sent was 23%, and 6% if repeat spine imaging via traumagram (partial/full-body computed tomography [CT]) was excluded as a repeat. The overall rate of repeat CT was 29% (7% dedicated spine CT scans and 22% part of nondedicated spine CT scan).An observation of only those patients with OSH imaging that was sent and viewable revealed that 23% underwent repeat spine imaging with 23% undergoing repeat spine CT and 41% repeat magnetic resonance imaging.In those patients with sent and viewable OSH imaging, a lack of reconstructions prompted 14% of repeats, whereas inadequate visualization of injury site prompted 8%. In only 8% of the repeats did it change management or provide necessary surgical information. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to investigate the frequency of repeat spine imaging in transfers with known spine injuries and found a substantially high rate of repeat spine CT with minimal alteration in care. Potential solutions include only performing scans at the OSH necessary to establish a diagnosis requiring transfer and improving communication between OSH and RI physicians. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

The effects of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status on length of stay and inpatient cost in the surgical treatment of isolated orthopaedic fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the impact of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status on postoperative length of stay (LOS) and to document the cost due to LOS after surgical management of the 8 most common lower extremity and 2 most common upper extremity isolated orthopaedic fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: All patients who presented and underwent one of the 10 selected isolated orthopaedic surgical procedures at a large tertiary care center between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2010. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Charts for patients undergoing the 10 selected isolated orthopaedic surgical fracture procedures more than 10 years were reviewed. Thirteen thousand seven hundred seventy-six distinct operations were identified. One thousand three hundred ninety-eight distinct operations were included in analysis after selection. INTERVENTION: This was an observational study. Patients who received operative management for isolated orthopaedic fractures were identified utilizing a CPT code search for analysis in a retrospective chart review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: LOS and cost secondary to LOS. RESULTS: ASA physical status proved the strongest predictor of postoperative LOS for the 8 most common lower extremity and 2 most common upper extremity isolated orthopaedic procedures. ASA was also a significant predictor of inpatient cost for all isolated orthopaedic procedures included in the study with the exception of CPT code 27536. CONCLUSIONS: ASA classification is an indicator for variance in LOS and total inpatient cost for hospitalized patients. Given that ASA classification is a universally collected data point, this method can be used in almost any hospital system and for any operative service. In addition, this study provides a foundation for many other studies to be conducted which will include multiple institutions and fracture types, such that ASA can be used as a more generalizable predictor of LOS and inpatient cost in orthopaedic trauma patients. This model may be used to accurately predict a patient's postoperative course and the expected cost to the health care system of a given procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The homeless orthopaedic trauma patient: follow-up, emergency room usage, and complications.

OBJECTIVES: To review homeless patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries and examine their emergency room (ER) usage, follow-up rates, and complication rates. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Patients presenting to a level 1 trauma center with orthopaedic trauma injuries from 2001 to 2010. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three uninsured homeless patients and 63 uninsured nonhomeless patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries were included. INTERVENTION: Homeless patients with orthopaedic trauma were identified through ER intake sheets and current procedural terminology code searches. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: ER usage, orthopaedic clinic follow-up, and complications. RESULTS: After the index visit to the ER for their orthopaedic trauma injuries, homeless patients demonstrated more ER visits and had fewer orthopaedic clinic follow-up visits than nonhomeless patients (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences among the type of complications (none, infection, hardware failure, and nonunion) between the homeless and the nonhomeless patients (P = 0.23). Operative homeless patients returned to the orthopaedic clinic for follow-up more than nonoperative homeless patients (mean = 5.4, SD = 7.6; and mean = 1.2, SD = 1.5, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our data are the first to examine the problems associated with homelessness in the patient with orthopaedic trauma and demonstrate an increased challenge in the follow-up care. The orthopaedic surgeon must consider these issues in managing this complex patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.