Cost Analysis of an Office-based Surgical Suite

Risk of adverse events due to high volumes of local anesthesia during Mohs micrographic surgery

General guidelines for the maximum amounts of locally injected lidocaine exist; however, there is a paucity of data in the Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) literature. This study aimed to determine the safety and adverse effects seen in patients that receive larger amounts of locally injected lidocaine. A retrospective chart review of 563 patients from 1992 to 2016 who received over 30 mL of locally injected lidocaine was conducted. Patient records were reviewed within seven postoperative days for complications. The average amount of anesthesia received was 40 mL, and the average patient weight was 86.69 kg. 1.4% of patients had a complication on the day of surgery, and 4.4% of patients had a complication within 7 days of the surgery. The most common complications were excessive bleeding/hematoma formation and wound infection. Only two complications could be attributable to local anesthetics. Gender, heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, and smoking were not significant risk factors for the development of complications. MMS is a safe outpatient procedure for patients that require over 30 mL of locally injected anesthesia. The safety of high volumes of lidocaine extends to patients with risk factors such as heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, and smoking.

Precaution Costs: The Presumption of Breast Cancer Seeding and Its Impact on Surgical Expenditure

As healthcare costs continue to rise at unsustainable rates (at an average rate of 5.5% a year), expenses without measurable outcomes need review.¹ In reconstructive surgery, empiric change of instruments between oncologic and reconstructive segments of surgery is one such practice. Breast surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), prophylaxis, and partial extirpation has little possible increase in seeding or implantation risk based on the literature. With undue extrapolation from higher risk cancers (such as ovarian), preventative practices of changing out trays, re-gloving, re-gowning, re-preparing, and re-draping between phases persist in operating rooms across the country. From real case costs, the additional expense of 2 surgical setups in the United States is conservatively estimated at $1232 per case, or over $125 million per year for this theoretical risk. Using implantation risk for core breast biopsies as a denominator, this cost is $1.65–$5.8 million per potential recurrence. This is an unacceptably high cost for hypothetical recurrence risk reduction, especially one that does not impact survival outcomes.

Current State of Surgical Lighting

Surgical performance in the operating room (OR) is supported by effective illumination, which mitigates the inherent environmental, operational, and visual challenges associated with surgery. Three critical components are essential to optimize operating light as illumination: (1) centering on the surgeon's immediate field, (2) illuminating a wide or narrow field with high-intensity light, and (3) penetrating into a cavity or under a flap. Furthermore, optimal surgical illumination reduces shadow, glare, and artifact in visualization of the surgical site. However, achieving these principles is more complex than at first glance, requiring a detailed examination of the variables that comprise surgical illumination. In brief, efficacious surgical illumination combines sufficient ambient light with the ability to apply focused light at specific operative stages and angles. But, brighter is not always merely better; rather, a nuanced approach, cognizant of the challenges inherent in the OR theater, can provide for a thoughtful exploration of how surgical illumination can be utilized to the best of its ability, ensuring a safe and smooth surgery for all.

Are Office-Based Oral and Maxillofacial Surgical Procedures Profitable? A Benefit-Cost Analysis

PURPOSE

Although many oral and maxillofacial surgical (OMS) procedures might seem to be profitable, no current data have analyzed the costs versus benefits of performing office-based OMS procedures. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the costs of performing 6 common office-based OMS procedures compared with the reimbursement rates for those same procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study was a cross-sectional, microcosting survey analyzing the costs of materials used in the outpatient Oral-Maxillofacial Surgery clinic at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. The costs incurred were based on dental procedure coding and national statistical databases and not on actual patient interactions. The primary predictor variable was the procedure costs for 6 commonly performed outpatient OMS procedures using 3 types of trays: a simple tray, a surgical tray, and an implant tray. The ancillary materials were listed for as-needed use for each tray. The primary outcome variable was the revenue after expenses per procedure. Descriptive statistics were computed. The net profit or net loss of performing 6 commonly performed outpatient OMS procedures was analyzed by subtracting the cost of performing the procedure from the insurance reimbursement for those procedures.

RESULTS

Without the addition of sedation to the procedures, routine extractions had a net loss of $230 to $261, surgical extractions had a net loss of $153 to $242, and incision and drainage procedures had a net loss of $212 to $311. Furthermore, preprosthetic procedures had a net loss to net profit of -$269 to +$140, and pathologic procedures had a net loss to net profit of -$269 to +$326. Only implant procedures yielded a net profit of $847.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study have demonstrated that not all routine OMS procedures are profitable when performed alone without the inclusion of additional procedures or sedation.

Wide-Awake Anesthesia in the In-Office Procedure Room: Lessons Learned

BACKGROUND

Wide-awake local anesthesia and no tourniquet (WALANT) has become more popular in hand surgery. Without a tourniquet, there is no need for preoperative testing or sedation. The use of lidocaine with epinephrine has allowed a larger variety of cases to be done safely in an outpatient setting instead of the hospital. "Minor field sterility," which uses fewer drapes and tools to accomplish the same procedures, is a concept that is also gaining recognition.

METHODS

Investigation of hand surgeons performing a majority of cases using WALANT and minor field sterility was the beginning of seeing its potential at our institution. Administration was concerned about patient safety, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction of the proposed changes. Analysis of our institution to determine location of these procedures was also imperative to using WALANT.

RESULTS

An in-office procedure room was built to allow for WALANT and minor field sterility. The requirements and logistics of developing an in-office procedure room for wide-awake surgery are reviewed in this article.

CONCLUSIONS

The concurrent use of WALANT and minor field sterility has created a hand surgery practice that is cost-effective for the patient and the facility and resulted in excellent patient outcomes and satisfaction.

SSET Project: Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Surgical Specialty Emergency Trays in the Emergency Department

Background:

We hypothesize that reusable, on-site specialty instrument trays available to plastic surgery residents in the emergency department (ED) for bedside procedures are more cost-effective than disposable on-site and remote re-usable operating room (OR) instruments at our institution.

Methods:

We completed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of disposable on-site kits and remote OR trays to a hypothetical, custom, reusable tray for ED procedures completed by PRS residents. Material costs of existing OR trays were used to estimate the purchasing and use-cost of a custom on-site tray for the same procedures. Cost of per procedure ‘consult time’ was estimated using procedure and resident salary.

Results:

Sixteen bedside procedures were completed over a 4.5 month period. A mean of 2.14 disposable kits were used per-procedure. Mean consultation time was 1.66 hours. Procedures that used OR trays took 3 times as long as procedures that used on-site kits (4 vs. 1.1 hours). Necessary, additional instruments were unavailable for 75% of procedures. Mean cost of using disposable kits and OR trays was $115.03/procedure versus an estimated $26.67/procedure cost of using a custom tray, yielding $88.36/procedure cost-savings. Purchase of a single custom tray ($1,421.55) would be redeemed after 2.3 weeks at 1 procedure/day. Purchasing 4 trays has projected annual cost-savings of $26,565.20.

Conclusion:

The purchase of specialized procedure trays will yield valuable time and cost-savings while providing quality patient care. Improving time efficiency will help achieve the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) goals of maintaining resident well-being and developing quality improvement competency.

Difference between biomarkers of tibial bone marrow and adipose tissue

BACKGROUND

Stem cells, with their regeneration capacity, long-term viability, and differentiation characteristics, have indispensable biological properties. As described by Hauner and Grigoradis et al., mesenchymal stem cell originating from adipose or bone marrow can be differentiated into many tissues such as adipocyte, chondrocyte, myeloblast, and osteoblast. The aim of our study is to compare the use of adipose and tibial bone marrow derived stem cells for therapeutic purposes in orthopedic surgery, which has not been clearly evaluated in the literature to our knowledge and to also evaluate their use.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Our study was performed between May 2014 and December 2016 in our clinic (Istanbul Medipol University, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology) in 40 patients. Twelve patients were excluded. The ages of the 28 included patients ranged from 19 to 61 years, with a mean of 41.18 ± 13.39 years. The stem cell samples of these patients were analyzed by flow cytometry.

RESULTS

Tibial bone marrow stem cells were used in 15 cases and the mean age was 49.33 ± 9.15. Adipose-derived stem cells were used in 13 patients and the mean age was 31.77 ± 11.25. None of the patients had any minor/major complication in the areas where stem cells were collected.

DISCUSSION

Tibial-derived bone marrow has better results with regard to the complications, economic burden, and surgery time. Tibial-derived bone marrow harvesting and stem cell preparation time are one-fourth of the stem cell treatment prepared from adipose tissue and the surgical duration is shortened by 45 min.

CONCLUSION

If stem cell use is the preference of the surgeon, we have found that the tibial-derived stem cell system is more advantageous for ease of acquisition, cost analysis, and surgical time.