A Review of Bundled Payments in Total Joint Replacement

How Do Bundled Payment Initiatives Account for Differences in Patient Risk Profiles? A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Bundled payments (BPs) are increasingly being adopted to enable the delivery of high-value care. For BPs to reach their goals, accounting for differences in patient risk profiles (PRPs) predictive of spending is crucial. However, insight is lacking into how this is done in practice. This study aims to fill this gap.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature published until February 2024, focusing on BP initiatives in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries. We collected data on initiatives' general characteristics, details on the (stated reasons for) approaches used to account for PRP, and suggested improvements. Patterns within and across initiatives were analyzed using extraction tables and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We included 95 documents about 17 initiatives covering various conditions and procedures. Across these initiatives, patient exclusion (n = 14) and risk adjustment (n = 12) of bundle prices were the most applied methods, whereas risk stratification was less common (n = 3). Most authors stated mitigating perverse incentives as the primary reason for PRP accounting. Commonly used risk factors included comorbidities and sociodemographic and condition/procedure-specific characteristics. Our findings show that, despite increasingly sophisticated approaches over time, key areas for improvement included better alignment with value and equity goals, and enhanced data availability for more comprehensive corrections for relevant risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

BP initiatives use various approaches to account for PRP differences. Despite a trend toward more sophisticated approaches, most remain basic with room for improvement. To enable cross-initiative comparisons and learning, it is important that stakeholders involved in BPs be transparent about the (reasons for) design choices made.

Trends in Payments for Ambulatory Surgery Center Facility Fees and Surgeon Professional Fees for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) have been shown to deliver high-quality care to patients at major cost savings to the health care system. The objective of this investigation was to examine trends in the Medicare facility and surgeon professional fee payments for hip and knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

Publicly available Medicare data were analyzed to determine professional and facility fee payments for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) to ASCs and hospitals between 2018 and 2024. The Physician Fee Schedule Lookup Tool and the Medicare ASC payment rate files were used to determine professional fee payments and facility fee reimbursements, respectively. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and percent change over time. The compound annual growth rates were calculated.

RESULTS

After adjusting for inflation, Medicare professional fees declined significantly over the study period for UKA ($1,487.44 versus $1,147.50; P = 0.003), TKA ($1,738.99 versus $1,278.59; P = 0.003), and THA ($1,740.73 versus $1,280.52; P = 0.003). Medicare ASC facility fees also declined, albeit to a lesser degree for UKA ($9,007.62 versus $8,905.71; P = 0.764), TKA ($10,204.46 versus $9,048.76; P = 0.027), and THA ($9,982.66 versus $9,238.05; P = 0.308). Facility fee reimbursement decreased year over year, with annual percent change ranging from -0.19% for UKA to -2.49% for THA. Trends in Medicare hospital facility fees directly mirrored ASC facility fees over the study period. Professional fees also declined year over year, with annual percent changes ranging from -3.81% for UKA to -4.41% for TKA and THA.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASC facility fees and professional fees both declined over the study period, with declines in professional fees far outpacing those of facility fees. Urgent reform of the Medicare payment structure is needed to ensure orthopaedic practice solvency and access to high-quality care for beneficiaries.

Association of bundled payments with spending, utilization, and quality for surgical conditions: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the body of literature examining episode-based bundled payment models effect on health care spending, utilization, and quality of care for surgical conditions.

BACKGROUND SUMMARY

Episode-based bundled payments were developed as a strategy to lower healthcare spending and improve coordination across phases of healthcare. Surgical conditions may be well-suited targets for bundled payments because they often have defined periods of care and widely variable healthcare spending. In bundled payment models, hospitals receive financial incentives to reduce spending on care provided to patients during a predefined clinical episode. Despite the recent proliferation of bundles for surgical conditions, a collective understanding of their effect is not yet clear.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted, and four databases were queried from inception through September 27, 2021, with search strings for bundled payments and surgery. All studies were screened independently by two authors for inclusion.

RESULTS

Our search strategy yielded a total of 879 unique articles of which 222 underwent a full-text review and 28 met final inclusion criteria. Of these studies, most (23 of 28) evaluated the impact of voluntary bundled payments in orthopedic surgery and found that bundled payments are associated with reduced spending on total care episodes, attributed primarily to decreases in post-acute care spending. Despite reduced spending, clinical outcomes (e.g., readmissions, complications, and mortality) were not worsened by participation. Evidence supporting the effects of bundled payments on cost and clinical outcomes in other non-orthopedic surgical conditions remains limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Present evaluations of bundled payments primarily focus on orthopedic conditions and demonstrate cost savings without compromising clinical outcomes. Evidence for the effect of bundles on other surgical conditions and implications for quality and access to care remain limited.

Medicaid Patients Travel Disproportionately Farther for Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Access to high-quality care for revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) is poorly understood but may vary based on insurance type. This study investigated distance traveled for hip and knee rTJA based on insurance type.

METHODS

A total of 317 revision hips and 431 revision knees performed between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Cluster sampling was used to select primary hips and knees for comparison. Median driving distance was compared based upon procedure and insurance type.

RESULTS

Revision hip and knee patients traveled 18.2 and 11.0 miles farther for surgery compared to primary hip and knee patients (P ≤ .001). For hip rTJA, Medicaid patients traveled farther than Medicare patients followed by commercially insured patients with median distances traveled of 98.4, 67.2, and 35.6 miles, respectively (P = .016). Primary hip patients traveled the same distance regardless of insurance type (P = .397). For knee rTJA, Medicaid patients traveled twice as far as Medicare and commercially insured patients (medians of 85.0, 43.5, and 42.2 miles respectively, P ≤ .046). Primary knee patients showed a similar pattern (P = .264). Age and ASA-PS classification did not indicate greater comorbidity in Medicaid patients.

CONCLUSION

Insurance type may influence rTJA referrals, with disproportionate referral of Medicaid and Medicare patients to nonlocal care centers. In addition to patient burden, these patterns potentially present a financial burden to facilities accepting referrals. Strategies to improve equitable access to rTJA, while maintaining the highest and most economical standards of care for patients, providers, and hospitals, are encouraged.

The International Initiative to Measure Perceived Risk in Arthroplasty: The Results From a Multinational Survey

BACKGROUND

There is an inherent moral imperative to avoid complications from arthroplasty. Doing so at ideal cost is also associated with surgeon reputation, and, increasingly in health care delivery systems that measure and competitively score outcomes, reimbursement to the surgeons and their hospitals. As a result, patients who are perceived to be in higher risk comorbidity groups, such as the obese and diabetics, as well as those challenged by socioeconomic factors may face barriers to access elective arthroplasty.

METHODS

In this initiative, surveys were sent to surgeons in 8 different countries, each adapted for their own unique payment, remuneration, and punitive models. The questions in the surveys pertained to surgeons' perception of risk regarding medical and socioeconomic factors in patients indicated for total hip or knee arthroplasty. This paper primarily reports on the results from Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

The health care systems varied between a universal/state funded health care system (Canada) to those that were almost exclusively private (India). Some health care systems have "bundled" payment with retention of fees for postoperative complications requiring readmission/reoperation and including some with public publication of outcome data (United States and the United Kingdom), whereas others had none (Canada). There were some major discrepancies across different countries regarding the perceived risk of diabetic patients, who have variable Hemoglobin A1c cut-offs, if any used. However, overall the perception of risk for age, body mass index, age, sex, socioeconomic, and social situations remained surprisingly consistent throughout the health care systems. Any limitations set were primarily driven by surgeon decision making and not external demands.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons will understandably try and optimize the health status of patients who have reversible risks as shown by best available evidence. The evidence is of variable quality, and, especially for irreversible social risk factors, limited due to concerns over cost and quality outcomes that can be influenced by experience-driven perceptions of risk. The results show that perceptions of risk do have such influence on access across many health care delivery environments. The authors recommend better risk-adjustment models for medical and socioeconomic risk factors with possible stratification/exclusions regarding reimbursement adjustments and reporting to help reverse disparities of access to arthroplasty.

Cemented versus Cementless Femoral Fixation for Elective Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Analysis of Short-Term Complication and Readmission Rates

Cementless fixation during total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the predominant mode of fixation utilized for both acetabular and femoral components during elective primary THAs performed in the United States. This study aims to compare early complication and readmission rates between primary THA patients receiving cemented versus cementless femoral fixation. The 2016-2017 National Readmissions Database was queried to identify patients undergoing elective primary THA. Postoperative complication and readmission rates at 30, 90, and 180 days were compared between cemented and cementless cohorts. Univariate analysis was conducted to compare differences between cohorts. Multivariate analysis was performed to account for confounding variables. Of 447,902 patients, 35,226 (7.9%) received cemented femoral fixation, while 412,676 (92.1%) did not. The cemented group was older (70.0 vs. 64.8, p < 0.001), more female (65.0% vs. 54.3%, p < 0.001), and more comorbid (CCI 3.65 vs. 3.22, p < 0.001) compared to the cementless group. On univariate analysis, the cemented cohort had decreased odds of periprosthetic fracture at 30 days postoperatively (OR: 0.556, 95%-CI 0.424-0.729, p < 0.0001), but higher odds of hip dislocation, periprosthetic joint infection, aseptic loosening, wound dehiscence, readmission, medical complications, and death at all timepoints. On multivariate analysis, the cemented fixation cohort demonstrated reduced odds of periprosthetic fracture at all postoperative timepoints: 30 (OR: 0.350, 95%-CI 0.233-0.506, p < 0.0001), 90 (OR: 0.544, 95%-CI 0.400-0.725, p < 0.0001), and 180 days (OR: 0.573, 95%-CI 0.396-0.803, p = 0.002). Cemented femoral fixation was associated with significantly fewer short-term periprosthetic fractures, but more unplanned readmissions, deaths, and postoperative complications compared to cementless femoral fixation in patients undergoing elective THA.

Bundled Care in Elective Total Joint Replacement: Payment Models in Sweden, Canada, and the United States: A Critical Analysis Review

➢

Rising health-care expenditures and payer dissatisfaction with traditional models of reimbursement have driven an interest in alternative payment model initiatives.

➢

Bundled payments, an alternative payment model, have been introduced for total joint replacement in Sweden, the United States, and Canada to help to curb costs, with varying degrees of success.

➢

Outpatient total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty are becoming increasingly common and provide value for patients and payers, but have negatively impacted providers participating in bundled payment models due to considerable losses and decreased reimbursement.

➢

A fine balance exists between achieving cost savings for payers and enticing participation by providers in bundled payment models.

➢

The design of each model is key to payer, provider, and patient satisfaction and should feature comprehensive coverage for a full cycle of care whether it is in the inpatient or outpatient setting, is linked to quality and patient-reported outcomes, features appropriate risk adjustment, and sets limits on responsibility for unrelated complications and extreme outlier events.

No Difference in Quality-Of-Life Outcomes in the First 7 Years Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Performed Using Computer Navigation Versus Conventional Referencing: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Computer navigation techniques can potentially improve both the accuracy and precision of prosthesis implantation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but its impact on quality-of-life outcomes following surgery remains unestablished.

METHODS

An institutional arthroplasty registry was queried to identify patients with TKA performed between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2019. Propensity score matching based on demographical, medical, and surgical variables was used to match computer-navigated to conventionally referenced cases. The primary outcomes were Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey scores (VR-12 PCS and MCS), Short Form 6 Dimension utility values (SF-6D), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in the first 7 years following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 629 computer-navigated TKAs were successfully matched to 1,351 conventional TKAs. The VR-12 PCS improved by a mean of 12.75 and 11.94 points in computer-navigated and conventional cases at 12-month follow-up (P = .25) and the VR-12 MCS by 6.91 and 5.93 points (P = .25), respectively. The mean VR-12 PCS improvement at 7-year follow-up (34.4% of the original matched cohort) for navigated and conventional cases was 13.00 and 12.92 points (P = .96) and for the VR-12 MCS was 4.83 and 6.30 points (P = .47), respectively. The mean improvement in the SF-6D utility score was 0.164 and 0.149 points at 12 months (P = .11) and at 7 years was 0.115 and 0.123 points (P = .69), respectively. Computer-navigated cases accumulated 0.809 QALYs in the first 7 years, compared to 0.875 QALYs in conventionally referenced cases (P = .65). There were no differences in these outcomes among a subgroup analysis of obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m²).

CONCLUSION

The use of computer navigation did not provide an incremental benefit to quality-of-life outcomes at a mean of 2.9 years following primary TKA performed for osteoarthritis when compared to conventional referencing techniques.

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Octogenarians: A National Database Analysis Including Over 700 Octogenarians

Background

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) may be considered for select patients to relieve pain and restore function of the knee joint. Little research to date has explored the complication profile of UKA in an older population. The current study uses a large national surgical database to examine the 30-day postoperative adverse events in octogenarians compared with those in nonoctogenarians.

Material and methods

The 2012-2018 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all patients undergoing UKA for osteoarthritis. Those patients aged 80 years or older composed the octogenarian age group. Demographics and medical comorbidities were cataloged, in addition to 30-day adverse events. Multivariate regression analysis controlled for differences in demographics and comorbidities. Significance was set at P < .05.

Results

A total of 10,103 patients undergoing UKA were identified, of which 728 (7.2%) were octogenarians. The octogenarian cohort had significantly higher comorbidity burden than nonoctogenarians. After controlling for demographics other than age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and medical comorbidities, octogenarians had higher 30-day odds of death (odds ratio [OR] = 6.12, P = .024), minor adverse events (OR = 2.97, P = .001), prolonged hospital length of stay (OR = 2.30, <0.001), nonhome discharge (OR = 4.50, P < .001), and readmission (OR = 1.72, P = .015), but did not experience increased odds of serious adverse events (OR = 1.07, P = .172) or return to the operating room (OR = 0.97, P = .881).

Conclusion

The present study found a statistically significant increase in several adverse events within 30 days of surgery for patients aged ≥80 years when compared with patients younger than 80 years. Namely, UKA in octogenarians was associated with significantly increased odds of short-term mortality, urinary tract infection, transfusion, prolonged hospital stay, and readmission.

How Did Orthopaedic Surgeons Perform in the 2018 Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System?

BACKGROUND

The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the latest value-based payment program implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. As performance-based bonuses and penalties continue to rise in magnitude, it is essential to evaluate this program's ability to achieve its core objectives of quality improvement, cost reduction, and competition around clinically meaningful outcomes.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked the following: (1) How do orthopaedic surgeons differ on the MIPS compared with surgeons in other specialties, both in terms of the MIPS scores and bonuses that derive from them? (2) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving penalties based on the MIPS? (3) What features of surgeons and practices are associated with receiving a perfect score of 100 based on the MIPS?

METHODS

Scores from the 2018 MIPS reporting period were linked to physician demographic and practice-based information using the Medicare Part B Provider Utilization and Payment File, the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System Data (NPPES), and National Physician Compare Database. For all orthopaedic surgeons identified within the Physician Compare Database, there were 15,210 MIPS scores identified, representing a 72% (15,210 of 21,124) participation rate in the 2018 MIPS. Those participating in the MIPS receive a final score (0 to 100, with 100 being a perfect score) based on a weighted calculation of performance metrics across four domains: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and costs. In 2018, orthopaedic surgeons had an overall mean ± SD score of 87 ± 21. From these scores, payment adjustments are determined in the following manner: scores less than 15 received a maximum penalty adjustment of -5% ("penalty"), scores equal to 15 did not receive an adjustment ("neutral"), scores between 15 and 70 received a positive adjustment ("positive"), and scores above 70 (maximum 100) received both a positive adjustment and an additional exceptional performance adjustment with a maximum adjustment of +5% ("bonus"). Adjustments among orthopaedic surgeons were compared across various demographic and practice characteristics. Both the mean MIPS score and the resulting payment adjustments were compared with a group of surgeons in other subspecialties. Finally, multivariable logistic regression models were generated to identify which variables were associated with increased odds of receiving a penalty as well as a perfect score of 100.

RESULTS

Compared with surgeons in other specialties, orthopaedic surgeons' mean MIPS score was 4.8 (95% CI 4.3 to 5.2; p < 0.001) points lower. From this difference, a lower proportion of orthopaedic surgeons received bonuses (-5.0% [95% CI -5.6 to -4.3]; p < 0.001), and a greater proportion received penalties (+0.5% [95% CI 0.2 to 0.8]; p < 0.001) and positive adjustments (+4.6% [95% CI 6.1 to 10.7]; p < 0.001) compared with surgeons in other specialties. After controlling for potentially confounding variables such as gender, years in practice, and practice setting, small (1 to 49 members) group size (adjusted odds ratio 22.2 [95% CI 8.17 to 60.3]; p < 0.001) and higher Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) scores (aOR 2.32 [95% CI 1.35 to 4.01]; p = 0.002) were associated with increased odds of a penalty. Also, after controlling for potential confounding, we found that reporting through an alternative payment model (aOR 28.7 [95% CI 24.0 to 34.3]; p < 0.001) was associated with increased odds of a perfect score, whereas small practice size (1 to 49 members) (aOR 0.35 [95% CI 0.31 to 0.39]; p < 0.001), a high patient volume (greater than 500 Medicare patients) (aOR 0.82 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.95]; p = 0.01), and higher HCC score (aOR 0.79 [95% Cl 0.66 to 0.93]; p = 0.006) were associated with decreased odds of a perfect MIPS score.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, orthopaedic surgeons performed well in the second year of the MIPS, with 87% earning bonus payments. Among participating orthopaedic surgeons, individual reporting affiliation, small practice size, and more medically complex patient populations were associated with higher odds of receiving penalties and lower odds of earning a perfect score. Based on these findings, we recommend that individuals and orthopaedic surgeons in small group practices strive to forge partnerships with larger hospital practices with adequate ancillary staff to support quality reporting initiatives. Such partnerships may help relieve surgeons of growing administrative obligations and allow for maintained focus on direct patient care activities. Policymakers should aim to produce a shortened panel of performance measures to ensure more standardized comparison and less time and energy diverted from established clinical workflows. The current MIPS scoring methodology should also be amended with a complexity modifier to ensure fair evaluation of surgeons practicing in the safety net setting, or those treating patients with a high comorbidity burden.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Dementia

There are few studies evaluating total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with dementia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of revision, complication, emergency department (ED) visitation, and discharge disposition in patients with dementia undergoing primary TKA. In this retrospective study, we evaluated patients from 2007 to 2017 using a national database. Ninety-day complications in patients with dementia undergoing TKA were increased risk of ED visitation and skilled nursing facility (SNF) disposition (p  ≤  0.05). Two-year complications in patients with dementia undergoing TKA were increased risk of ED visitation and SNF disposition (p  ≤  0.05). Patients with dementia undergoing TKA are at an increased risk of resource utilization.

Modifiable risk factors increase length of stay and 90-day cost of care after shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Baseline health conditions can negatively impact cost of care and risk of complications after joint replacement, necessitating additional care and incurring higher costs. Bundled payments have been used for hip and knee replacement and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is testing bundled payments for upper extremity arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of predefined modifiable risk factors (MRFs) on total encounter charges, hospital length of stay (LOS), related emergency department (ED) visits and charges, and related hospital readmissions within 90 days after shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

We queried the electronic medical record (EPIC) for all shoulder arthroplasty cases under DRG 483 within a regional 7-hospital system between October 2015 and December 2019. Data was used to calculate mean LOS, total 90-day charges, related emergency department (ED) visits and charges, and related hospital readmissions after shoulder arthroplasty. Data for patients who had 1 or more MRFs, defined as anemia (hemoglobin < 10 g/dL), malnutrition (albumin < 3.4 g/dL), obesity (BMI > 40), uncontrolled diabetes (random glucose > 180 mg/dL or glycated hemoglobin > 8.0%), tobacco use (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, code indicating patient is a smoker), and opioid use (opioid prescription within 90 days of surgery), were evaluated as potential covariates to assess the relationship between MRFs and total encounter charges, LOS, ED visits, ED charges, and hospital readmissions.

RESULTS

A total of 1317 shoulder arthroplasty patients were identified. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that anemia (+$19,847, confidence interval [CI] $15,743, $23,951; P < .001), malnutrition (+$5850, CI $3712, $7988; P < .001), and obesity (+$2762, CI $766, $4758, P = .007) independently contributed to higher charges after shoulder arthroplasty. Mean LOS was higher in patients with anemia (5.0 ± 4.0 days vs. 2.2 ± 1.6 days, P < .001), malnutrition (3.7 ± 2.8 days vs. 2.2 ± 1.5 days, P < .001), and uncontrolled diabetes (2.8 ± 2.8 days vs. 2.3 ± 1.7 days, P = .019). Univariate risk factors associated with a significant increase in total 90-day encounter charges included anemia (+$19,345, n = 37, P < .001), malnutrition (+$6971, n = 116, P < .001), obesity (+$2615, n = 184, P = .011), and uncontrolled diabetes (+$4377, n = 66, P = .011). Univariate risk for readmission within 90 days was higher in patients with malnutrition (odds ratio 3.0, CI 1.8, 4.9; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Malnutrition, obesity, and anemia contribute to significantly higher costs after shoulder arthroplasty. Medical strategies to optimize patients before shoulder arthroplasty are warranted to reduce total 90-day encounter charges, length of stay, and risk of readmission within 90 days of surgery. Optimizing patient health before shoulder surgery will positively impact outcomes and cost containment for patients, institutions, and payors after shoulder arthroplasty.

Value-Based Healthcare in Urology: A Collaborative Review

CONTEXT

In response to growing concerns over rising costs and major variation in quality, improving value for patients has been proposed as a fundamentally new strategy for how healthcare should be delivered, measured, and remunerated.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature regarding the implementation and impact of value-based healthcare in urology.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was performed to identify studies that described the implementation of one or more elements of value-based healthcare in urologic settings and in which the associated change in healthcare value had been measured. Twenty-two publications were selected for inclusion.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Reorganization of urologic care around medical conditions was associated with increased use of guidelines-compliant care for men with prostate cancer, and improved outcomes for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Measuring outcomes for every patient was associated with improved prostate cancer outcomes, while the measurement of costs using time-driven activity-based costing was associated with reduced resource utilization in a pediatric multidisciplinary clinic. Centralization of urologic cancer care in the UK, Denmark, and Canada was associated with overall improved outcomes, although systems integration in the USA yielded mixed results among urologic cancer patients. No studies have yet examined bundled payments for episodes of care, expanding the geographic reach for centers of excellence, or building enabling information technology platforms.

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies have critically assessed the actual or simulated implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, but the available literature suggests promising early results. In order to effectively redesign care, there is a need for further research to both evaluate the potential results of proposed value-based healthcare interventions and measure their effects where already implemented.

PATIENT SUMMARY

While few studies have evaluated the implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, the available literature suggests promising early results.

The Cost of an Episode of Care in a Total Knee Arthroplasty Patient Is More Than a Total Hip Arthroplasty Patient Within an Alternative Payment Model

BACKGROUND

Alternative payment models were set up to increase the value of care for total joint arthroplasty. Currently, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are reimbursed within the same bundle. We sought to determine whether it was appropriate for these cases to be included within the same bundle.

METHODS

The data were collected from consecutive patients in a bundled payment program at a single large academic institution. All payments for 90 days postoperatively were included in the episode of care. Readmission rates, demographics, and length of stay were collected for each episode of care.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in cost of episode of care between TKA and THA, with the average TKA episode-of-care cost being higher than the average THA episode-of-care cost ($25803 vs $23805, P < .0001). There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups between gender, race, medical complexity, disposition outcome, and length of stay. The TKA group trended toward a lower readmission rate (5.3%) compared to the THA group (6.6%).

CONCLUSION

The cost of an episode of care for patients within the bundled payment model is significantly higher for patients undergoing TKA compared with those undergoing a THA. This should be taken into consideration when determining payment plans for patients in alternative payment plans, along with other aspects of risk that need to be considered in order to allow for hospitals to be successful under the bundled payment model.