Abstract
ABSTRACTObjectives: Certificates of Need (CON) laws were introduced to improve resource utilization and reduce unnecessary health-care expansion. While many states have repealed their use, the debate continues as to their efficacy in achieving these goals. As such, we asked: 1) Are there differences in TSA incidence in CON/non-CON states? 2) Are there differences in procedural charges or reimbursement between CON/non-CON states? 3) Are there differences in the proportion of cases treated in high-, mid- or low-volume facilities between groups? 4) Are there differences in complications and length-of-stay (LOS) between high-volume and low-volume facilities?Methods: The 100% Medicare Standard Analytic files were queried for all TSA between 2005 and 2013, with minimum 1-year follow-up. Publically available data was used to identify states that upheld or repealed CON regulations, and comparisons were subsequently made between groups for normalized incidence of TSA per year and procedural charges and reimbursement rates. Comparisons were then made regarding the distribution of high-, mid- and low volume facilities, post-operative complication rates, and length-of-stay (LOS) between the different volume centers.Results: 167,288 patients undergoing TSA were identified. Normalized rates of TSA increased in both groups. Non-CON states had higher per-patient reimbursement, but paradoxically lower reimbursement rates compared with CON states. CON regulations lead to a greater proportion of procedures being performed in high-volume facilities compared with non-CON (p = 0.002). Finally, 30-day and 1-year complications, and length-of-stay, were significantly lower in high-volume facilities versus low-volume facilities (p ≤ 0.016).Conclusions: Where upheld, CON regulations contributed to a notable increase in the percentage of procedures performed in high-volume facilities, which in turn lead to a significant reduction in post-operative complications and LOS. Further study is necessary to definitely establish this relationship and the utility of CON regulations for the delivery of TSA care, particularly as it relates to clinical outcomes.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
More From: The Physician and Sportsmedicine
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.