Value Analysis of Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis with an Intact Rotator Cuff.

BACKGROUND: While anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has historically been considered the ideal treatment for end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has recently gained popularity. With substantial differences in implant design and cost between TSA and RSA, further investigation of outcomes and value is needed to support recent trends. The purpose of this study was to use the average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER and ICER) and the procedure value index (PVI) to examine differences in outcomes and value between TSA and RSA for treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-cohort study of patients treated with primary shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff who had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Outcome measures analyzed included the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and overall satisfaction. Patients treated with TSA were matched 4:1 to those treated with RSA based on sex, age, and preoperative SST score. Value differences between TSA and RSA were calculated. Radiographs were analyzed for preoperative glenoid classification and postoperative radiolucent lines and gross loosening. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-two TSA-treated patients were matched to 63 RSA-treated patients with no significant differences in sex, age, or preoperative SST score. Total hospitalization costs, charges, and reimbursements along with outcome improvements in units of minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups. For RSA, the implant cost was significantly higher than that for TSA, but the operating room, anesthesia, and cement costs were lower. The TSA group had a 3.2% rate of gross glenoid loosening and a 2.4% revision rate. There was no loosening or revision in the RSA group. None of the value analytics differed between groups even after inclusion of the outcomes and costs of early TSA revisions. CONCLUSIONS: TSA and RSA demonstrated similar outcomes and value when used to manage glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Is Cost-Effective Compared with Hemiarthroplasty: A Real-World Economic Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Although outcome studies generally demonstrate the superiority of a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) over a hemiarthroplasty (HA), comparative cost-effectiveness has not been well studied. From a publicly funded health-care system's perspective, this study compared the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in patients who underwent TSA with those in patients who underwent HA. METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model to simulate the costs and QALYs for patients undergoing either TSA or HA over a lifetime horizon to account for costs and medically important events over the patient lifetime. Subgroup analyses by age groups (≤50 or >50 years) were performed. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed to assess robustness of study findings. The results were presented in 2019 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: TSA was dominant as it was less costly ($115,785 compared with $118,501) and more effective (10.21 compared with 8.47 QALYs) than HA over a lifetime horizon. Changes to health utility values after TSA and HA had the largest impact on the cost-effectiveness findings. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, HA was not found to be cost-effective. The probability that TSA was cost-effective was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a WTP of $50,000 per QALY gained, from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health-care system, TSA was found to be cost-effective in all patients, including those ≤50 years of age, compared with HA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifying surgeon and institutional drivers of cost in total shoulder arthroplasty: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Despite rapid increases in the demand for total shoulder arthroplasty, data describing cost trends are scarce. We aim to (1) describe variation in the cost of shoulder arthroplasty performed by different surgeons at multiple hospitals and (2) determine the driving factors of such variation. METHODS: A standardized, highly accurate cost accounting method, time-driven activity-based costing, was used to determine the cost of 1571 shoulder arthroplasties performed by 12 surgeons at 4 high-volume institutions between 2016 and 2018. Costs were broken down into supply costs (including implant price and consumables) and personnel costs, including physician fees. Cost parameters were compared with total cost for surgical episodes and case volume. RESULTS: Across 4 institutions and 12 surgeons, surgeon volume and hospital volume did not correlate with episode-of-care cost. Average cost per case of each institution varied by factors of 1.6 (P = .47) and 1.7 (P = .06) for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), respectively. Implant (56% and 62%, respectively) and personnel costs from check-in through the operating room (21% and 17%, respectively) represented the highest percentages of cost and highly correlated with the cost of the episode of care for TSA and RSA. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in episode-of-care total costs for both TSA and RSA had no association with hospital or surgeon case volume at 4 high-volume institutions but was driven primarily by variation in implant and personnel costs through the operating room. This analysis does not address medium- or long-term costs.

The value of artificial neural networks for predicting length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient costs after anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The objective is to develop and validate an artificial intelligence model, specifically an artificial neural network (ANN), to predict length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and inpatient charges for primary anatomic total (aTSA), reverse total (rTSA), and hemi- (HSA) shoulder arthroplasty to establish internal validity in predicting patient-specific value metrics. METHODS: Using data from the National Inpatient Sample between 2003 and 2014, 4 different ANN models to predict LOS, discharge disposition, and inpatient costs using 39 preoperative variables were developed based on diagnosis and arthroplasty type: primary chronic/degenerative aTSA, primary chronic/degenerative rTSA, primary traumatic/acute rTSA, and primary acute/traumatic HSA. Models were also combined into diagnosis type only. Outcome metrics included accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) for a receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: A total of 111,147 patients undergoing primary shoulder replacement were included. The machine learning algorithm predicting the overall chronic/degenerative conditions model (aTSA, rTSA) achieved accuracies of 76.5%, 91.8%, and 73.1% for total cost, LOS, and disposition, respectively; AUCs were 0.75, 0.89, and 0.77 for total cost, LOS, and disposition, respectively. The overall acute/traumatic conditions model (rTSA, HSA) had accuracies of 70.3%, 79.1%, and 72.0% and AUCs of 0.72, 0.78, and 0.79 for total cost, LOS, and discharge disposition, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our ANN demonstrated fair to good accuracy and reliability for predicting inpatient cost, LOS, and discharge disposition in shoulder arthroplasty for both chronic/degenerative and acute/traumatic conditions. Machine learning has the potential to preoperatively predict costs, LOS, and disposition using patient-specific data for expectation management between health care providers, patients, and payers.

Cost analysis and complication profile of primary shoulder arthroplasty at a high-volume institution.

BACKGROUND: Paralleling the increased utilization of shoulder arthroplasty, bundled-payment reimbursement is becoming increasingly common. An understanding of the costs of each element of care and detailed information on the frequency of and reasons for readmission and reoperation are keys to developing bundled-payment initiatives. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive analysis of complications, readmission rates, and costs of primary shoulder arthroplasty at a high-volume institution. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2016, 2 shoulder surgeons from a single institution performed 1794 consecutive primary shoulder arthroplasties: 636 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs), 1081 reverse shoulder arthroplasties (RSAs), and 77 hemiarthroplasties. A cost analysis was designed to include a period of 60 days preoperatively, the index surgical hospitalization, and 90 days postoperatively, including costs of any readmission or reoperation. RESULTS: The 90-day complication, reoperation, and readmission rates were 2.3%, 0.6%, and 1.8%, respectively. The 90-day readmission risk was higher among patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or greater; a 1-unit increase in the American Society of Anesthesiologists score was associated with a $429 increase in index cost. Of the hospital readmissions, 10 were directly related to the index arthroplasty whereas 21 were not. The median standardized costs were as follows: preoperative evaluation, $481; index surgical hospitalization, $15,758; and postoperative care, $183. The median standardized costs for index surgical hospitalization were different for each procedure: TSA, $14,010; RSA, $16,741; and hemiarthroplasty, $12,709. CONCLUSION: In this study, primary shoulder arthroplasty was associated with low 90-day reoperation and complication rates. The median standardized costs inclusive of preoperative workup and 90-day postoperative recovery were $14,675 and $17,407 for TSA and RSA, respectively.

Current diagnosis-related group-based bundling for upper-extremity arthroplasty: a case of insufficient risk adjustment and misaligned incentives.

BACKGROUND: The current Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services diagnosis-related group (DRG) bundled-payment model for upper-extremity arthroplasty does not differentiate between the type of arthroplasty (anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty [ATSA] vs. reverse total shoulder arthroplasty vs. total elbow arthroplasty [TEA] vs. total wrist arthroplasty) or the diagnosis and indication for surgery (fracture vs. degenerative osteoarthritis vs. inflammatory arthritis). METHODS: The 2011-2014 Medicare 5% Standard Analytical Files (SAF5) database was queried to identify patients undergoing upper-extremity arthroplasty under DRG-483 and -484. Multivariate linear regression modeling was used to assess the marginal cost impact of patient-, procedure-, diagnosis-, and state-level factors on 90-day reimbursements. RESULTS: Of 6101 patients undergoing upper-extremity arthroplasty, 3851 (63.1%) fell under DRG-484 and 2250 (36.9%) were classified under DRG-483. The 90-day risk-adjusted cost of an ATSA for degenerative osteoarthritis was $14,704 ± $655. Patient-level factors associated with higher 90-day reimbursements were male sex (+$777), age 75-79 years (+$740), age 80-84 years (+$1140), and age 85 years or older (+$984). Undergoing a TEA (+$2175) was associated with higher reimbursements, whereas undergoing a shoulder hemiarthroplasty (-$1000) was associated with lower reimbursements. Surgery for a fracture (+$2354) had higher 90-day reimbursements. Malnutrition (+$10,673), alcohol use or dependence (+$6273), Parkinson disease (+$4892), cerebrovascular accident or stroke (+$4637), and hyper-coagulopathy (+$4463) had the highest reimbursements. In general, states in the South and Midwest had lower 90-day reimbursements associated with upper-extremity arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Under the DRG-based model piloted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, providers and hospitals would be reimbursed the same amount regardless of the type of surgery (ATSA vs. hemiarthroplasty vs. TEA), patient comorbidity burden, and diagnosis and indication for surgery (fracture vs. degenerative pathology), despite each of these factors having different resource utilization and associated reimbursements. Lack of risk adjustment for fracture indications leads to strong financial disincentives within this model.

Impact of Increasing Comorbidity Burden on Resource Utilization in Patients With Proximal Humerus Fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Proximal humerus fractures (PHF) are a common upper extremity fracture in the elderly cohort. An aging and more comorbid cohort, along with recent trends of increased operative intervention, suggests that there could be an increase in resource utilization caring for these patients. We sought to quantify these trends and quantify the impact that comorbidity burden has on resource utilization. METHODS: Data on 83,975 patients with PHFs were included from the Premier Healthcare Claims database (2006 to 2016) and stratified by Deyo-Charlson index. Multivariable models assessed associations between Deyo-Charlson comorbidities and resource utilization (length and cost of hospitalization, and opioid utilization in oral morphine equivalents [OME]) for five treatment modalities: (1) open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), (2) closed reduction internal fixation (CRIF), (3) hemiarthroplasty, (4) reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, and (5) nonsurgical treatment (NST). We report a percentage change in resource utilization associated with an increasing comorbidity burden. RESULTS: Overall distribution of treatment modalities was (proportion in percent/median length of stay/cost/opioid utilization): ORIF (19.1%/2 days/$11,183/210 OME), CRIF (1.1%/4 days/$11,139/220 OME), hemiarthroplasty (10.7%/3 days/$17,255/275 OME), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (6.4%/3 days/$21,486/230 OME), and NST (62.7%/0 days/$1,269/30 OME). Patients with an increased comorbidity burden showed a pattern of (1) more pronounced relative increases in length of stay among those treated operatively (65.0% for patients with a Deyo-Charlson index >2), whereas (2) increases in cost of hospitalization (60.1%) and opioid utilization (37.0%) were more pronounced in the NST group. DISCUSSION: In patients with PHFs, increased comorbidity burden coincides with substantial increases in resource utilization in patients receiving surgical and NSTs. Combined with known increases in operative intervention, trends in increased comorbidity burden may have profound effects on the cohort level and resource utilization for those with PHFs, especially because the use of bundled payment strategies for fractures increases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Use and Cost of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Acute Proximal Humerus Fractures.

Although reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) may outperform hemiarthroplasty (HSA) for acute proximal humerus fractures (PHF), both the RTSA implant and the procedure are more expensive. The goal of this study was to compare the use and longitudinal cost of care for RTSA vs HSA for the treatment of PHF. Patients were selected from a private payer database with a surgical date between 2010 and 2015. The International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification(ICD-9-CM), codes were used to identify patients who underwent RTSA and HSA for PHF. The 1-year cost follow-up was guaranteed. During the study period, a total of 1038 patients underwent RTSA and 1046 patients underwent HSA for the treatment of PHF. A total of 601 patients who underwent RTSA and 431 patients who underwent HSA with at least 1 year of follow-up were matched by age and sex. The average Charlson Comorbidity Index for the RTSA and HSA groups was 4, indicating similar health status. From 2010 to 2015, the use of RTSA increased linearly (R2=0.986), whereas the use of HSA decreased linearly (R2=0.796). The average index admission cost was higher for RTSA than for HSA ($15,263 vs $14,356, respectively; mean difference [MD], $907; 95% confidence interval [CI], $58-$1760; P=.04). At 1 year postoperatively, however, no statistically significant difference was noted in cost (P=.535). The 1-year physical and occupational therapy cost per patient was higher after HSA than after RTSA (MD, $723; CI, $718-$728; P<.001), but no difference was noted in discharge disposition or 1-year revision or readmission rates. The results of this study suggest that despite the higher initial cost of RTSA, the total cost of care in the year after RTSA and HSA is similar. Therefore, RTSA should be considered in the appropriate clinical setting. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(2):119-125.].

The Cost-Effectiveness of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction Internal Fixation for Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly.

Background: Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of proximal humerus fractures in elderly individuals (age >70) carries a relatively high short-term complication and reoperation rate but is generally durable once healed. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for fractures may be associated with superior short-term quality of life but carries the lifelong liabilities of joint replacement. The tradeoff between short and long-term risks, coupled with disparities in quality of life and cost, makes this clinical decision amenable to cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods: A Markov state-transition model was constructed with a base case of a 75 year-old patient. Reoperation rates, quality of life values, mortality rates, and costs were based upon published literature. The model was run until all patients had died to simulate the accumulated costs and benefits. Results: RTSA was associated with greater quality of life (7.11 QALYs) than ORIF (6.22 QALYs). RTSA was cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $3,945/QALY and $27,299/ QALY from payor and hospital perspectives, respectively. RTSA was favored and cost-effective at any age above 65 and any Charlson Score. The model was sensitive to the utility of both procedures. Conclusion: RTSA resulted in a higher quality of life and was cost-effective in comparison to ORIF for elderly patients.Level of Evidence: III.

Surgeon charges and reimbursements are declining compared with hospital payments for shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between surgeon and hospital charges and payments for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has not been well examined. The goal of this study was to report trends and variation in hospital charges and payments compared with surgeon charges and payments for TSA. METHODS: The 5% Medicare sample was used to capture hospital and surgeon charges and payments for TSA from 2005 to 2014. Two values were calculated: (1) the charge multiplier (CM), which is the ratio of hospital to surgeon charges, and (2) the payment multiplier (PM), which is the ratio of hospital to surgeon payments. The year-to-year variation and regional trends in patient demographic characteristics, Charlson Comorbidity Index, length of stay (LOS), CM, and PM were evaluated. RESULTS: The study included 10,563 patients. Per-patient hospital charges increased from $33,836 to $67,177 (99.9% increase), whereas surgeon charges increased from $4284 to $4674 (9.1% increase) (the CM increased from 7.9 to 14.4, P < .0001). Hospital payments increased from $8758 to $14,167 (61.8%), whereas surgeon payments decreased from $1028 to $884 and the PM increased from 8.5 to 16.0 (P < .0001). The LOS decreased significantly (P < .0001), whereas the Charlson Comorbidity Index remained stable. Both the CM (r2 = 0.931) and PM (r2 = 0.9101) were strongly negatively associated with the LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital charges and payments relative to surgeon charges and payments have increased substantially for TSA despite stable patient complexity and a decreasing LOS. These results encourage the need for future studies with detailed cost analyses to identify the reasons for hospital and surgeon financial malalignment.

Bundled Payment Plans Are Associated With Notable Cost Savings for Ambulatory Outpatient Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Bundling of services, typically into a 90-day episode of care, is intended to facilitate cost reduction. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of a private insurance bundling program on the costs of outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) at a freestanding ambulatory surgery center. METHODS: A cost minimization analysis was done of patients who had anatomic TSA by a single surgeon at a single freestanding ambulatory surgery center, including line-by-line comparisons of demographic and comorbidity factors for all patients treated within the 90-day episode of care. RESULTS: Seventy-six primary anatomic TSAs were included, 39 in the bundled group and 37 outside of the program. The bundled group was on average older (58 years) than the unbundled group (54 years, P = 0.021), but the groups were otherwise similar in demographics. The average total implant charges were significantly less for the bundled group ($24,822.43 versus $28,405.51, P = 0.014). Average total surgery supply charges and anesthesia supply charges were similar (P > 0.05). Mean total outpatient surgical day charges (implants, surgical, and anesthesia equipment) were significantly less for the bundled group ($29,782.43 versus $33,238.68, P = 0.022), as were average operating room staffing costs ($135.37 versus $162.55, P = 0.015). During the 90-day postoperative period, charges were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Primary anatomic TSA using a bundled care program in an outpatient setting coincides with markedly lower charges. The primary driver of this reduction is implant pricing, which is negotiated as part of the bundle. Surgeons must carefully analyze their unique practices in the changing economic health care environment when creating an outpatient TSA and/or bundling program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III economic analysis.

The value of shoulder replacement and rotator cuff surgery: the patients' perspective.

BACKGROUND: With the continued rise in health care costs, value-based care in orthopedics is more important than ever. Health care providers, policymakers, and insurance companies all have input into defining and setting the level of this value. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient perception of value in rotator cuff repair (RCR) and total shoulder replacement (TSA) using a population composed only of patients who underwent the procedure. METHODS: We were able to obtain complete data from 191 of the 250 patients in the RCR cohort and 211 of the 250 patients in the TSA cohort. Patients were asked what they believe a surgeon should be reimbursed for performing RCR or TSA, what they would be willing to pay for the procedure, and to rate the importance of each aspect of their care. Patients then estimated what Medicare reimbursed for the procedure they underwent. RESULTS: The mean result for patients surveyed regarding a reasonable fee for surgeons was $9870 for RCR and $14,231 for TSA. The mean patient estimate for actual Medicare reimbursement was $5705 for RCR and $9372 for TSA. Fifty-seven percent thought that payment for RCR was too low, and 76% thought that it was too low for TSA. When asked to rate the importance of each aspect of their care, RCR patients felt that 46% should go to the surgeon. TSA patients felt that surgeons should receive 47%. CONCLUSION: In agreement with prior studies, patients perceived the monetary value of RCR and TSA to be much higher than current Medicare schedules.

Shoulder Arthroplasty for a Fracture Is Not the Same as Shoulder Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis: Implications for a Bundled Payment Model.

INTRODUCTION: The Center for Medicare Services currently bundles all shoulder arthroplasties, total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, into one Diagnosis-Related Group on which bundled reimbursements are then further characterized. An arthroplasty performed for traumatic indications, such as fractures, may have a different postoperative course of care compared with the one being done for degenerative arthritis/osteoarthritis (OA), despite having the same Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Diagnosis-related Group code. METHODS: The 2012 to 2016 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases were queried using CPT-23472 to retrieve records of patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty/reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for degenerative arthritis/OA or proximal humerus fracture. RESULTS: A total of 8,283 (92.5%) and 667 (7.5%) patients underwent a shoulder arthroplasty for OA and proximal humeral fracture, respectively. After adjustment, the fracture group was associated with a higher risk for a longer length of stay of >2 days (P < 0.001), 30-day surgical complications (P = 0.005), revision surgeries within 30 days (P = 0.008), 30-day medical complications (P < 0.001), pulmonary embolism (P = 0.013), postoperative transfusions (P < 0.001), non-home discharge (P < 0.001), and 30-day readmissions (P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Shoulder arthroplasty is associated with higher resource utilization when this procedure is performed for a fracture. As we move toward the era of bundled payment models, an appropriate risk adjustment based on the indication of surgery should be promoted to maintain the quality of care for all patients.

An analysis of costs associated with shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with variation in direct costs with shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all shoulder arthroplasties performed at a single facility between July 1, 2011, and November 30, 2016. We collected patient factors, indications, procedure (including implant details), implant brand (A, B, and other), and complications. We collected direct costs over a 90-day period using a validated internal tool. We identified patient and procedure characteristics associated with costs using multivariable generalized linear models. RESULTS: A total of 361 patients were included, 19% with revision arthroplasty procedures, 32% with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties, and 66% with reverse total shoulder arthroplasties (RTSAs). Of total costs, 13% were operative facility utilization costs and 58% were operative supply costs. Factors associated with increased total cost included younger age (P = .002) and an indication for surgery of other, that is, not osteoarthritis, a failed arthroplasty, or the sequelae of a rotator cuff tear (P = .030). Factors associated with increased operative costs included younger age (P = .002), use of an RTSA (P < .001), use of a bone graft (P < .001), implant brand B (P = .098), implant brands other than A and B (P = .04), the sequelae of a rotator cuff tear as an indication for surgery (P = .041), or an indication for surgery of other (P = .007). CONCLUSION: Most short-term (90-day) costs with shoulder arthroplasty are operative costs. Nonmodified factors associated with increased cost included younger age and less common indications for surgery, whereas potentially modifiable factors included the intraoperative use of a bone graft, implant brand, and RTSA use.

Medicaid payer status is associated with increased mortality and morbidity after inpatient shoulder arthroplasty: a multistate analysis, 2007-2014.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inpatient shoulder arthroplasty is widely performed around the USA at an increasing rate. Medicaid insurance has been identified as a risk factor for inferior surgical outcomes. We sought to identify the impact of being Medicaid-insured on in-hospital mortality, readmission, complications, and length of stay (LOS) in patients who underwent inpatient shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: We analyzed 89 460 patient discharge records for inpatient total, partial, and reverse shoulder arthroplasties using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases for California, Florida, New York, Maryland, and Kentucky from 2007 through 2014. We compared patient demographics, present-on-admission comorbidities, and hospital characteristics by insurance payer. We estimated multilevel mixed-effect multivariate logistic regression models and generalized linear models to assess insurance's effect on in-hospital mortality, readmission, infectious complications, cardiac complications, and LOS; models controlled for patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Medicaid-insured patients had greater odds than patients with private insurance, other insurance, and Medicare of inpatient mortality (OR: 4.61, 95% CI 2.18 to 9.73, p<0.001) and 30-day and 90-day readmissions (OR: 1.94, 95% CI 1.57 to 2.38, p<0.001; OR: 1.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.38, p<0.001, respectively). Compared with private insurance, other insurance, and Medicare patients, Medicaid patients had increased likelihood of developing infectious complications and were expected to have longer LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports our hypothesis that among inpatient shoulder arthroplasty patients, those with Medicaid insurance have worse outcomes than patients with private insurance, other insurance, and Medicare. These results are relatively consistent with previous findings in the literature.

Quantification of patient-level costs in outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patient-level costs of inpatient and outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) irrespective of payer status are seldom reported. The purpose of this study was to compare patient-level costs of primary elective TSA between inpatient and outpatient surgery centers. METHODS: By use of the Texas Health Care Information Collection database, inpatient and outpatient TSAs performed between 2010 and 2015 were identified according to billing codes. Patient-level costs (total charges and itemized charges) were analyzed according to type of surgery center (inpatient vs outpatient) and inpatient volume (high volume vs low volume). Statistical comparisons were performed using 1-way analysis of variance and 2-sample independent t tests. Mixed-model analysis of variance was used to compare the rate of cost change between inpatient and outpatient TSAs from 2010-2015. P < .05 represented statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 21,331 inpatient TSAs and 1542 outpatient TSAs were performed from 2010-2015 in the state of Texas. Inpatient TSA costs were significantly higher than outpatient TSA costs ($76,109 [standard deviation (SD), $48,981] vs $22,907 [SD, $13,599]; P < .001). After exclusion of inpatient-specific charges, inpatient TSA remained 41.1% more expensive than outpatient TSA ($32,330 [SD, $24,221] vs $22,907 [SD, $13,599]; P < .0001). High-volume inpatient TSA was less expensive than low-volume inpatient TSA; however, high-volume inpatient TSA remained 33.4% more costly than outpatient TSA even after exclusion of inpatient-specific charges ($30,579 [SD, $23,233] vs $22,907 [SD, $13,599]; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In the state of Texas, the patient-level costs of primary elective inpatient TSA were significantly higher than those of the equivalent outpatient procedure. This difference persisted after exclusion of low-volume inpatient TSA centers and inpatient-specific ancillary charges.

Short-term outcomes associated with drain use in shoulder arthroplasties: a prospective, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the immediate outcomes during the perioperative period associated with drains in the setting of total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesized that drain use would result in lower postoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit levels that would increase transfusion rates and longer hospital stays that would increase hospital costs. METHODS: The study prospectively randomized 100 patients (55% women; average age, 69.3 years) who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse shoulder arthroplasty to receive a closed-suction drainage device (drain group, n = 50) or not (control group, n = 50) at the time of wound closure. Basic demographic information and intraoperative and postoperative data were collected. RESULTS: The groups were similar with respect to basic patient demographics. Postoperatively, drains had no effect on transfusion rates or any perioperative complication (P > .715). There were also no significant differences in hemoglobin or hematocrit levels immediately after surgery or on postoperative day 1. On average, patients were discharged from the hospital 1.6 days and 2.1 days postoperatively in the control and drain groups, respectively (P = .124). The average cost associated for the control cohort's hospital stay was $35,796 ± $13,078 compared with $43,219 ± $24,679 for the drain cohort (P = .063). DISCUSSION: Drain use after shoulder arthroplasty had no appreciable difference on short-term perioperative outcomes, postoperative anemia, length of hospital stay, or cost. It is possible that the potential negative effects of postoperative drainage are blunted by the routine use of tranexamic acid.

Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of the subacromial spacer for irreparable and massive rotator cuff tears.

PURPOSE: There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal surgical treatment of irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCT). This study aimed to assess within the Italian health care system the cost-effectiveness of subacromial spacer as a treatment modality for patients with IRCT. METHODS: An expected-value decision analysis was created comparing costs and outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic subacromial spacer implantation, rotator cuff repair (RCR), total shoulder arthroplasty, and conservative treatment for IRCTs. A broad literature search provided input data to extrapolate and inform treatment success and failure rates, costs, and health utility states for these outcomes. The primary outcome assessed was an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of subacromial spacer implantation versus shoulder arthroplasty, RCR, and conservative treatment. RESULTS: Subacromial spacer is favorable over both arthroscopic partial repair and shoulder arthroplasty since it costs less than both options and increases effectiveness by 0.06 and 0.10 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. While conservative treatment is the least costly management strategy, subacromial spacer results in a gain of 0.05 QALYs for the additional cost of 522 €, resulting in an ICER of 10,440 €/QALY gain, which is below the standard willingness to pay ratio of $50,000 USD. Strategies with an ICER of less than 50,000 USD are considered to be cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence and reasonably conservative assumptions, subacromial spacer is likely to provide a safe, effective, and cost-effective option for patients with massive IRCTs. Furthermore, this cost-effectiveness analysis may ultimately serve as a guide for development of health care system and insurer policy as well as clinical practice.

Value comparison of humeral component press-fit and cemented techniques in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Press-fit humeral fixation for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been shown to have loosening rates and outcomes similar to a cemented technique; however, increased value has not been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the press-fit technique could improve the value of RSA using the procedure value index (PVI). METHODS: Primary RSA patients with complete hospitalization cost data, preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, and postoperative satisfaction were included. The PVI was calculated as improvement in the SST score (in units of minimal clinically important difference) divided by total cost and normalized. Itemized cost data were obtained from hospital financial records and categorized. Radiographic complications, infections, and revisions were noted. Comparisons were made between the press-fit and cemented RSA cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 176 primary RSA patients (83 cemented and 93 press fit) met the inclusion criteria (mean follow-up period, 44.6 months). Surgical indications (except failed rotator cuff repair), baseline SST scores, and demographic characteristics were similar. The calculated minimal clinically important difference for the SST score was 3.98. The average PVI was significantly greater in the press-fit cohort (1.51 vs 1.03, P < .001), representing a 47% difference. SST score improvement was not significantly different (P = .23). However, total hospitalization costs were significantly lower for the press-fit cohort ($10,048.89 vs $13,601.14; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Use of a press-fit technique led to a 47% increase in value over a cemented technique. This appeared to be a function of decreased total costs rather than increased outcome scores.

The procedure value index: a new method for quantifying value in shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to introduce the procedure value index (PVI) and apply this value instrument to shoulder arthroplasty. The PVI uses the value equation in units of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) to provide an objective system of quantifying value-driven care. Secondarily, we describe the PVI for both primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) to highlight value differences between these patient populations. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty with minimum 2-year follow-up were identified retrospectively. MCIDs were determined for the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score. Cost data were reported as total hospitalization costs, total charges, and total reimbursements. The PVI was calculated as the ratio of outcome improvement in units of MCID over the cost of care. Mean PVIs for TSA and RSA were compared. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. MCIDs for the SST, ASES, VAS pain, and SANE scores were 3.61, 29.49, 3.28, and 37.05, respectively. With the exception of the ASES score, improvements in units of MCID were not different between TSA and RSA. However, total hospitalization costs and charges were significantly higher for RSA (P < .001). PVIs based on total hospitalization costs and total charges for the SST, ASES, and VAS pain scores were significantly greater for TSA (P < .05). No other PVI was significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The PVI was greater for TSA when total hospitalization costs and total charges were considered. The PVI helps highlight value differences in shoulder arthroplasty.