Improving cost efficiency on a vascular surgery service

Clinical process optimization of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: The avoidance of prolonged hospital stay is a major goal in the management of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) - medically and economically. Materials & methods: We compared the time range of the preprocedural length of stay in 2014/2015 with 2016/2017, after the implementation of the TAVI coordinator in 2016. This included restructured pathways for screening and pre-interventional diagnosis, performed examinations during the inpatient stay and major outcome variables. Results: After 2016, we observed a significant reduction in preprocedural length of stay (admission to procedure) compared with 2014/2015 (11.3 ± 7.9 vs 7.5 ± 5.6 days, p = 0.001). There was no difference in other major outcome variables. Conclusion: The introduction of the TAVI coordinator caused a shortening of preprocedural length of stay.

Claims Variability in Charges and Payments for Common Open and Endovascular Procedures

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness in healthcare is being increasingly scrutinized. Data regarding claims variability for vascular operations are lacking. Herein, we aim to describe variability in charges and payments for aortoiliac (AI) and infrainguinal (II) revascularizations.

METHODS

We analyzed 2012-2014 claims data from a statewide claims database for procedures grouped by Current Procedural Terminology codes into II-open (II-O), II-endovascular (II-E), AI-open (AI-O), and AI-endovascular interventions (AI-E). We compared charges and payments in urban (≥50,000 people, UAs) versus rural areas (<50,000 people, RAs). Amounts are reported in $US as median with interquartile range. Cost-to-charge ratios (CCRs) as a measure of reimbursement were calculated as the percentage of the charges covered by the payments. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed to determine significant differences.

RESULTS

A total of 5,239 persons had complete claims data. There were 7,239 UA and 6,891 RA claims, and 1,057 AI claims (AI-E = 879, AI-O = 178) and 4,182 II claims (II-E = 3,012, II-0 = 1,170). Median charges were $5,357 for AI [$1,846-$27,107] and $2,955 for II [$1,484-$9,338.5] (P < 0.0001). Median plan payment was $454 for AI [$0-$1,380] and $454 for II [$54-$1,060] (P = 0.67). For AI and II, charges were significantly higher for UA than RA (AI: UA $9,875 [$2,489-$34,427], RA $3,732 [$1,450-$20,595], P < 0.0001; II: UA $3,596 [$1,700-$21,664], RA $2,534 [$1,298-$6,169], P < 0.0001). AI-E charges were higher than AI-O (AI-E $7,960 [$1,699-$32,507], AI-O $4,774 [$2,636-$7,147], P < 0.0001), but AI-O payments were higher (AI-E $424 [$0-$1,270], AI-O $869 [$164-$1,435], P = 0.0067). II-E charges were higher (II-E $2,994 [$1,552-$22,164], II-O $2,873 [$1,108-$5,345], P < 0.0001), but II-O payments were higher (II-E $427 [$50-$907], II-O $596 [$73-$1,299], P < 0.0001). CCRs were highest for II operations and UAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variability in claim charges and payments exists for vascular operations. AI procedures had higher charges than II, without any difference in payments. UA charged more than RA for both AI and II operations, but RA had higher payments and CCRs. Endovascular procedures had higher charges, while open procedures had higher payments. Charge differences may be related to endovascular device costs, and further research is necessary to determine the reasons behind consistent claims variability between UA and RA.

Length of Stay after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Depends on Indication and Acuity

BACKGROUND

Length of stay (LOS) is a commonly used metric to optimize value in medical care. Although pathways have been developed for some procedures in vascular surgery to reduce LOS, they do not yet exist for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The purpose of this study is to identify and define the risk factors for prolonged LOS in patients undergoing TEVAR to facilitate pathway development.

METHODS

We included TEVAR patients in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2005 to 2015. Prolonged LOS was defined as LOS > 75th percentile of the overall cohort (11 days). Because initial analysis revealed the distinct clinical differences between dissection and aneurysm patients, further analysis was stratified by aortic pathology. Student's t-test and Chi-square tests were used to compare demographic and perioperative variables between dissection and aneurysm patients, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the predictors for prolonged LOS.

RESULTS

A total of 3,021 patients underwent TEVAR, with 858 patients (28.4%) undergoing TEVAR for dissection and 2,163 (71.6%) undergoing TEVAR for aneurysm. An initial analysis with logistic regression identified dissection indication (odds ratio [OR], 2.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-7.3) as an independent predictor of prolonged LOS. Further analysis for prolonged LOS was subsequently performed separating dissection and aneurysm patients. Aneurysm patients were older (71.2 ± 11.7 vs. 63.1 ± 13.6 years, P < 0.001), more often Caucasian (76.8% vs. 61.8%, P < 0.001), and had more medical comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac history, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, transient ischemic attack [TIA], P < 0.001). In contrast, dissection patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification score (58.5% had >3 ASA vs. 45.5%, P < 0.001), longer hospitalizations (10.2 ± 9.3 vs. 8.5 ± 10.4 days, P < 0.001), were more likely to have been transferred from another hospital or emergency room (58.4% vs. 48.3%, P < 0.001), and were more often emergent (32.4% vs. 15.4%, P < 0.001). In dissection patients, ASA classification score (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1) and dialysis (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.0-3.9) were independent predictors for prolonged LOS. In aneurysm patients, dependent functional status (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8), diabetes (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8), cardiac history (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9), emergency status (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8), and dialysis (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.2-3.7) predicted prolonged LOS. Postoperative complications including stroke/TIA; failure to wean from ventilator, sepsis, and pneumonia; and need for reoperation similarly increased LOS in both dissection and aneurysm patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissection and aneurysm patients undergoing TEVAR are comprised of different patient populations, with dissection patients more often enduring prolonged hospitalizations. In contrast, TEVAR performed for nonemergent aneurysm repair had the shortest LOS. These data support the development of separate pathways defined by indication and acuity for patients undergoing TEVAR.

The cost of major lower limb amputation: a 12-year experience

BACKGROUND

The amputee population is elderly, has significant medical co-morbidities and perioperative mortality leading to high financial implications. Commonly used outcomes in the literature are survival, prosthetic use and mobility.

OBJECTIVES

Our study aims to share our 12-year experience of amputee care, concentrating on perioperative mortality and patient rehabilitation.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study in the form of a retrospective case series.

METHODS

In total, 130 amputations, performed between January 1998 and December 2009, were followed up for a mean of three and a half years and analyzed for demographics, vascular history, operation details, prosthetic use, mobility and mortality.

RESULTS

The population was 59.2% male, had a mean age of 73 and the most common indication for amputation was critical ischaemia (78.5%). The average length of acute inpatient stay was 63 days with a 30-day mortality rate of 15.3% and inpatient mortality of 29.3%. In total, 63.3% of patients were issued with a prosthesis with 48.2% of all patients achieving at least indoor mobility, transtibial (49.9%) rehabilitated better than transfemoral amputees (24.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the urgent need for action to improve perioperative mortality in the amputee population, with the added advantage of reducing its financial impact. Clinical relevance Our study gives an overview of the clinical journey taken by a 12-year amputee population. By following this cohort from initial procedure through to rehabilitation or mortality we provide the reader with a valuable insight into the difficulties of managing this population and the likely outcomes for these patients.

System to decrease length of stay for vascular surgery

OBJECTIVES

Reduction of length of stay (LOS) is critical for optimal use of hospital resources. We developed and evaluated a system to aggressively reduce LOS for vascular surgery.

METHOD

Key to this system, which we introduced on January 1, 2001, was appointment of a LOS officer, who communicated daily during hospitalization with patients and families about discharge planning, organized outpatient services for wound care and rehabilitation to transition patients quickly to nonhospital care, and had biweekly meetings with relevant paramedical services. LOS for 509 patients operated on in 2000 (standard group) was compared with LOS for 474 operated on in 2001 and 595 patients operated on in 2002 (LOS reduction groups). Data for all patients with aortic aneurysm, carotid artery stenosis, lower extremity critical ischemia or amputation, and foot debridement were included.

RESULTS

LOS in 2000 averaged 8.5 days, compared with 5.9 days in 2001 and 5.6 days in 2002. All decreases in LOS for each diagnostic category in 2001 and 2002 were statistically significant (P = <.001-.03). There was no significant increase in readmission rate (2.2% vs 1.9% and 2.0%, respectively), mortality rate (0.8% vs 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively), or percent of patients who received endovascular treatment (18% vs 16% and 14%, respectively). These decreases in LOS saved the hospital more than US dollars 616200 in 2001, and US dollars 847550 in 2002 (US dollars 500/patient-day).

CONCLUSIONS

A committed LOS officer with major specific daily responsibilities for decreasing LOS and discharging patients resulted in a 31% to 33% decrease in LOS, with important cost savings to the hospital and no negative effect on patient care.