Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery Research Articles

Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Are Quality Scores in the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System Associated With Outcomes After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery?

Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Are Quality Scores in the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System Associated With Outcomes After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery?

Are Quality Scores in the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System Associated With Outcomes After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery?

The Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) ties reimbursement incentives to clinician performance to improve healthcare quality. It is unclear whether the MIPS quality score can accurately distinguish between high-performing and low-performing clinicians. (1) What were the rates of unplanned hospital visits (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions) within 7, 30, and 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries? (2) Was there any association of MIPS quality scores with the risk of an unplanned hospital visit (emergency department visits, observation stays, or unplanned admissions)? Between January 2018 and December 2019, a total of 605,946 outpatient orthopaedic surgeries were performed in New York State according to the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Of those, 56,772 patients were identified as Medicare beneficiaries and were therefore potentially eligible. A further 34% (19,037) were excluded because of missing surgeon identifier, age younger than 65 years, residency outside New York State, emergency department visit on the same day as outpatient surgery, observation stay on the same claim as outpatient surgery, and concomitant high-risk or eye procedures, leaving 37,735 patients for analysis. The database does not include a list of all state residents and thus does not allow for censoring of patients who move out of state. We chose this dataset because it includes nearly all hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers in a large geographic area (New York State) and hence is not limited by sampling bias. We included 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical encounters among Medicare beneficiaries in New York State from 2018 to 2019. For the 37,735 outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures included in our study, the mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 73 ± 7 years, 84% (31,550) were White, and 59% (22,071) were women. Our key independent variable was the MIPS quality score percentile (0 to 19th, 20th to 39th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th) for orthopaedic surgeons. Clinicians in the MIPS program may receive a bonus or penalty based on the overall MIPS score, which ranges from 0 to 100 and is a weighted score based on four subscores: quality, promoting interoperability, improvement activities, and cost. The MIPS quality score, which attempts to reward clinicians providing superior quality of care, accounted for 50% and 45% of the overall MIPS score in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Our main outcome measures were 7-day, 30-day, and 90-day unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. To determine the association between MIPS quality scores and unplanned hospital visits, we estimated multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models controlling for MIPS quality scores; patient-level (age, race and ethnicity, gender, and comorbidities), facility-level (such as bed size and teaching status), surgery and surgeon-level (such as surgical procedure and surgeon volume) covariates; and facility-level random effects. We then used these models to estimate the adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits across MIPS quality score percentiles after adjusting for covariates in the multivariable models. In total, 2% (606 of 37,735), 2% (783 of 37,735), and 3% (1013 of 37,735) of encounters had an unplanned hospital visit within 7, 30, or 90 days of outpatient orthopaedic surgery, respectively. Most hospital visits within 7 days (95% [576 of 606]), 30 days (94% [733 of 783]), or 90 days (91% [924 of 1013]) were because of emergency department visits. We found very small differences in unplanned hospital visits by MIPS quality scores, with the 20th to 39th percentile of MIPS quality scores having 0.71% points (95% CI -1.19% to -0.22%; p = 0.004), 0.68% points (95% CI -1.26% to -0.11%; p = 0.02), and 0.75% points (95% CI -1.42% to -0.08%; p = 0.03) lower than the 0 to 19th percentile at 7, 30, and 90 days, respectively. There was no difference in adjusted rates of unplanned hospital visits between patients undergoing surgery with a surgeon in the 0 to 19th, 40th to 59th, or 60th to 100th percentiles at 7, 30, or 90 days. We found that the rates of unplanned hospital visits after outpatient orthopaedic surgery among Medicare beneficiaries were low and primarily driven by emergency department visits. We additionally found only a small association between MIPS quality scores for individual physicians and the risk of an unplanned hospital visit after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. These findings suggest that policies aimed at reducing postoperative emergency department visits may be the best target to reduce overall postoperative unplanned hospital visits and that the MIPS program should be eliminated or modified to more strongly link reimbursement to risk-adjusted patient outcomes, thereby better aligning incentives among patients, surgeons, and the Centers for Medicare ad Medicaid Services. Future work could seek to evaluate the association between MIPS scores and other surgical outcomes and evaluate whether annual changes in MIPS score weighting are independently associated with clinician performance in the MIPS and regarding clinical outcomes. Level III, therapeutic study.

Multimodal Pain Management After Outpatient Orthopedic Hand Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Trial

Opioid stewardship ensures effective pain management while avoiding overprescribing of opioids after surgery. This prospective randomized study investigates the efficacy of a multimodal postoperative pain regimen compared to a traditional opioid-only pain regimen following elective outpatient orthopedic hand surgery. We hypothesized that patients receiving multimodal pain management would consume fewer opioids and report greater satisfaction than patients receiving only opioids. Consecutive patients undergoing outpatient hand and upper extremity surgery performed by two board-certified fellowship-trained orthopedic hand surgeons at one institution were recruited and randomized into either a study or control group. The study group received a standing multimodal postoperative regimen consisting of scheduled oral acetaminophen and naproxen as well as oxycodone to be taken as needed. The control group received only oxycodone to be taken as needed. Postoperatively, daily pain levels, medication usage, refills, satisfaction, and adverse events were recorded. Descriptive statistics were performed. Of the 112 patients enrolled, 54 were randomized to the control group, and 58 were randomized to the study group. Study and control group patients did not differ significantly based on daily average pain scores or daily worst pain scores. However, study group patients reported fewer average daily oxycodone intake and total oxycodone pill count (7.0 vs 2.4 total pills, P <.005). In addition, the study group patients were more likely to report satisfaction with their postoperative pain control than control regimen patient's and were more likely to use the same pain regimen again if required. A multimodal postoperative pain regimen reduces opioid usage and has higher patient satisfaction rates in comparison to traditional opioid-only regimens. Use of multimodal pain regimens that use nonopioids, such as acetaminophen and naproxen, over an opioid should be considered for postoperative pain after orthopedic hand surgery. Therapeutic II.

Does the addition of post-operative gabapentin reduce the use of narcotics after orthopedic surgery?

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of post-operative gabapentin administration as an analgesic agent and its effect on narcotic use after orthopedic surgery in an outpatient sports medicine practice by comparing patients prior to and after initiating the routine use of gabapentin as part of a standardized post-operative pain medication regimen. We hypothesized that adding gabapentin to a multimodal post-operative pain regimen would decrease the number of requested pain medication refills and have no detrimental effect on Visual Analogue Scale and Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation scores at these early post-operative visits. Methods All outpatient surgical patients, <90 years of age, undergoing outpatient orthopedic surgery by the study’s senior author were included between 08/05/2021 and 02/22/2022. Patients were allowed 1 narcotic refill post-operatively and only in the first 3 weeks. The primary outcome was difference in percentage of patients who requested a narcotic refill within 3 weeks post-op. Two- and 6-week Visual Analogue Scale and Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation scores, and baseline health and demographic data. T-tests were run on continuous variables, Chi-Square or Fisher’s Exact Test were run on dichotomous variables, and Mann–Whitney U test was run on all other categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at P < .05 for all tests. Results There was a significant difference in narcotic refills at 3 weeks: 23 pre-gabapentin patients and 9 post-gabapentin patients (22.8% vs 9.0%, respectively: P = .006). There were no differences between 2- and 6-week Visual Analogue Scale and 2-week Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation scores. There was a significant difference in 6-week SANE between groups: mean difference = 6.4 (P = .027) though less than the established MCID. Conclusion Addition of gabapentin to a post-operative multimodal pain regimen reduced the use of narcotics after orthopedic sports medicine surgeries while also providing equivalent pain control.

Risk Factors for Surgical Site Complications After Outpatient Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Background: With the recent increase of minor lumbar spine surgeries being performed in the outpatient setting, there is a need for information on factors that contribute to post-operative complications for these surgeries. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective observational study examining risk factors for self-reported post-operative drainage in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery. Patient surveys and the hospital's electronic medical records were used to collect data on patient demographic, patient lifestyle, and surgical variables. Univariable and multivariable analyses in addition to a random forest classifier were performed. Results: A total of 146 patients were enrolled in the study with 111 patients included in the final analysis. The average age and body mass index (BMI) of these patients was 66 and 27.8, respectively. None of the 146 patients in this study developed surgical site infection. Older age, no steroid use, no pet ownership, and spine surgery involving two or more levels were all found to be risk factors for wound drainage. Conclusions: This study evaluated lifestyle, environmental, and traditional risk factors for surgical site drainage that have not been explored cohesively related to outpatient orthopedic surgery. Consistent with the existing literature, outpatient spine surgery involving two or more levels was most strongly associated with surgical site drainage after surgery.

Postoperative emergency department visits for pain after outpatient orthopaedic surgery: did rescheduling hydrocodone make a difference?

Background: In 2014, the United States Drug Enforcement Agency rescheduled hydrocodone from schedule III to II to mitigate the opiate crisis in America. Hydrocodone has long served as common pain medication after outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures in the United States. We hypothesize rescheduling of hydrocodone would correlate with an increase in postoperative emergency department visits for pain. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all outpatient orthopaedic procedures and identified all patients who subsequently presented to our emergency department for postoperative pain for the one calendar year prior to and after the rescheduling of hydrocodone. Results: We identified 2984 orthopaedic procedures and 3193 emergency department visits for postoperative pain across all surgical specialties. 875 orthopaedic procedures occurred prior to hydrocodone rescheduling with 48 postoperative ED visits for pain (5.4%). 2109 procedures occurred after the rescheduling of hydrocodone with 123 ED visits for pain postoperatively (5.8%). 199 patients presented to the ED for postoperative pain, for a total of 345 visits. The median postoperative time to emergency room visit for the pre-rescheduling group was 6.5 days versus 4.0 days post-rescheduling. Conclusions: We identified statistically significant differences in postoperative medication and prescribed amounts. We identified no difference in the proportion of patients that went to the emergency room by timeframe relative to hydrocodone rescheduling, nor did we identify a difference between samples in terms of gender, race, insurance status, and comorbid conditions. Increased restriction on hydrocodone prescribing did not increase emergency department visits for pain after outpatient orthopaedic surgery. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic III.

Does Having a Beard Matter? An Analysis of Orthopaedic Surgical Site Infection Rates in Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery

Objectives Post-operative infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in outpatient orthopaedic surgery. Orthopaedic surgical site infections have been estimated to occur in up to 5.6% of patients. Prior research has evaluated infection prevention related to operating room attire and hygiene, but no study has evaluated the effect on postoperative infection rates from surgeons having a beard. Methods Two fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons operated on a total of 940 patients during a consecutive 12-month period. During the first six months, surgeons were clean-shaven, and in the last six months, surgeons maintained a beard. A standard mask was worn at all times. Infectious complication data were collected retrospectively. Major infection was defined as hospitalization and/or return to the operating room, and minor infection was classified using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Surveillance Criteria for surgical site infections (SSI). Results Three (0.31%) patients developed a major infection, and 57 (6.05%) patients developed a minor infection. Of 471 patients operated on when surgeons were clean-shaven, two (0.42%) and 30 (6.62%) developed a major or minor infection, respectively. Of the 469 patients operated on when surgeons had beards, one (0.21%) and 27 (5.75%) patients developed a major or minor infection. The difference in major (P=1.00) and minor (P=0.80) infection rates between the 6-month periods was insignificant. Conclusions Similar infection rates for outpatient surgery were found when the surgeons did and did not have a beard. These findings indicate that while wearing a standard surgical mask, a surgeon having a beard at the time of surgery does not affect the postoperative infection rate.

Spanish-Speaking Patients Have Limited Access Scheduling Outpatient Orthopaedic Appointments Compared With English-Speaking Patients Across the United States

To evaluate whether Spanish-speaking patients can obtain appointments to outpatient orthopaedic surgery clinics across the United States at a similar rate as English-speaking patients and to examine the language interpretation services available at those clinics. Orthopaedic offices nationwide were called by a bilingual investigator to request an appointment with a pre-established script. The investigators called in English asking for an appointment for an English-speaking patient (English-English), called in English requesting an appointment for a Spanish-speaking patient (English-Spanish), and called in Spanish asking for an appointment for a Spanish-speaking patient (Spanish-Spanish) in a random order. During each call whether an appointment was given, the number of days to the offered appointment, the mechanism of interpretation available in clinic, and whether the patient's citizenship or insurance information was requested was collected. A total of 78 clinics included in the analysis. There was a statistically significant decrease in access to scheduling an orthopaedic appointment in the Spanish-Spanish group (26.3%) compared with English-English (61.3%) or English-Spanish (58.8%) groups (P < .001). There was no significant difference in access to appointment between rural and urban areas. Patients in the Spanish-Spanish group who made an appointment were offered in-person interpretation 55% of the time. There was no statistically significant difference in time from call to offered appointment or the request for citizenship status between the 3 groups. This study detected a considerable disparity regarding access to orthopaedic clinics nationwide in the individuals who called to establish an appointment in Spanish. Patients in the Spanish-Spanish group were able to make an appointment less often but had in-person interpreters available for interpretation services. With a large Spanish-speaking population in the United States, it is important to understand how lack of proficiency with the English language may affect access to orthopaedic care. This study uncovers variables associated with difficulties scheduling appointments for Spanish-speaking patients.

Examining Health Disparities in Orthopedic Care During COVID-19.

Demographics and socioeconomic status affect the delivery of medical care resulting in healthcare disparities. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on existing healthcare disparities, including access to healthcare in the outpatient orthopedic surgery clinic. The medical records of 3006 patients treated at the University of Kentucky Orthopedic Surgery Department prior to COVID-19 (April 2018, 2019), and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) were retrospectively reviewed for demographic data, distance to clinic, and type of visit. We then compared the total number of patient visits, new patient visits, telehealth visits, and the patient's insurance provider (public or private) between the time period prior to and during the pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were significant declines in the number of patients seen, new patient presentations, and publicly insured patients. Thirty-three percent of visits were telemedicine visits in 2020 compared to 0% pre-COVID (P < .0001). There was a lower proportion of initial visits in 2020 (P < .0001). The majority of patients paid via private/commercial insurance (1798, 59.8%), with a greater proportion paying via private/commercial insurance in 2020 (P < .001). The median average household income was increased in 2020 (P < .001). While COVID-19 resulted in a significant decline in overall access to care, there were negative ramifications particularly on patients with new complaints and those of lower socioeconomic status. Future endeavors should be focused on correcting the obstacles to accessing care, exacerbated by the pandemic, that these vulnerable populations face.

Longitudinal Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Utility of Asynchronous Testing for Subspecialty-Level Ophthalmic Care

Telehealth in ophthalmology has traditionally focused on preventive disease screening with limited use in outpatient evaluation. The unique conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic afforded the opportunity to evaluate different implementations of teleophthalmology at scale, providing insight into expanding teleophthalmology care. To compare telehealth use in ophthalmology with other specialties and assess the feasibility of augmenting ophthalmic telehealth encounters with asynchronous testing during the COVID-19 pandemic. This quality improvement study evaluated retrospective, longitudinal, observational data from the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic (January 1, 2020, through July 31, 2021) for 881 080 patients receiving care from outpatient primary care, cardiology, neurology, gastroenterology, surgery, neurosurgery, urology, orthopedic surgery, otolaryngology, obstetrics/gynecology, and ophthalmology clinics of the University of California, San Francisco. Asynchronous testing was evaluated for teleophthalmology encounters. A hybrid care model wherein ophthalmic testing data were acquired asynchronously and used to augment telehealth encounters. Telehealth as a percentage of total volume of ambulatory care and use of asynchronous testing for ophthalmic conditions. The volume of in-person outpatient visits dropped by 83.3% (39 488 of 47 390) across the evaluated specialties at the onset of shelter-in-place orders for the COVID-19 pandemic, and the initial use of telehealth increased for these specialties before stabilizing over the 18-month study period. In ophthalmology, telehealth use peaked at 488 of 1575 encounters (31.0%) early in the pandemic and returned to mostly in-person visits as COVID-19 restrictions lifted. Elective use of telehealth was highest in gastroenterology, urology, neurology, and neurosurgery and lowest in ophthalmology. Asynchronous testing was combined with 126 teleophthalmology encounters, resulting in change of clinical management for 32 patients (25.4%) and no change for 91 (72.2%). Telehealth increased across various specialties during the COVID-19 pandemic. Combining teleophthalmic visits with asynchronous testing suggested that this approach is feasible for subspecialty-level evaluation. Additional study is needed to evaluate whether asynchronous testing outside the same institution could provide an effective and lasting approach for expanding the reach of ophthalmic telehealth.

Role of MRI and T2 mapping in osteoarthritis of knee joint

Introduction: osteoarthritis is the most common joint disease and the leading cause of long-term disability, placing tremendous financial burdens at the individual and societal levels. Indeed, the onset of biochemical changes leading to irreversible cartilage loss. Objective: to clarify the role of conventional MRI anT2 mapping in patients with osteoarthritis of knee joint. Materials and methods: This prospective study was conducted between June 2019 and July 2021, on 40 cases; 30 patients clinically presented with knee pain and 10 healthy volunteers as a control group. They were referred from outpatient clinics and orthopedic surgery department to Radio-diagnosis and Medical Imaging Department of Tanta university hospitals for assessment by MRI. This study was approved by the ethics committee of Tanta University. Results: The mean and standard deviation for T2 values of cartilage that measured at 4 compartments of the knee joint were elevated in patients clinically suspected to have osteoarthritic changes than healthy volunteers with statistically significant P values (&lt;0.001) at 4 compartments. Conclusions: MRI is a powerful non-invasive tool for both diagnosis and characterization of cartilage degeneration.

Preoperative Education for Less Outpatient Pain after Surgery (PELOPS trial) in orthopedic patients—study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundSuccessful pain management after outpatient surgery requires proper education leading to correct decisions on the analgesics use at home. Despite different strategies adopted, up to ½ of patients receive little or no information about the treatment of postoperative pain, 1/3 of them are not able to follow postoperative analgesia instructions. This leads to higher rates of unmet needs in pain treatment, post-discharge emergency calls, and readmissions. Structured educational interventions using psychological empowering techniques may improve postoperative pain management. We hypothesize that preoperative education on use of an improved pain scale to make correct pain management decisions will improve the quality of post-operative pain management at home and reduce analgesics-related side effects.MethodsA total of 414 patients scheduled for an outpatient orthopedic surgery (knee/shoulder arthroscopic interventions) are included in this randomized (1:1) controlled trial. Patients in the control arm receive standard information on post-discharge pain management. Patients in the experimental arm receive structured educational intervention based on the rational perception of postoperative pain and discomfort (anchoring and improved pain scale), and the proper use of analgesics. There is no difference in post-discharge analgesics regimen in both arms. Patients are followed for 30 days post-discharge, with the primary outcome expressed as total pain relief score at 5 days. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of severe pain during 30 days, changes in sleep quality (Pittsburg Sleep Quality Assessment), and patients’ perception of postoperative pain management assessed with the International Pain Outcomes questionnaire at day 30 post-discharge.DiscussionThe developed intervention, based on an improved pain scale, offers the advantages of being non-surgery-specific, is easily administered in a short amount of time, and can be delivered individually or in-group, by physicians or nurses.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT03754699. Registered on November 27, 2018.

A Physician Assistant Is Associated With Higher Patient Satisfaction With Outpatient Orthopedic Surgery.

Patient satisfaction is increasingly used to assess the quality of care and determine physician reimbursement. Patient characteristics influence patient satisfaction, but the effect of physician practice parameters on satisfaction has not been studied in detail. Outpatient satisfaction scores from 11,059 patients who rated 24 orthopedic surgeons from a single institution were studied. Practice-related parameters were collected in a provider-reported survey. Univariate logistic regressions were used to test the associations between each provider characteristic and the likelihood of receiving a 5-star rating on a selection of 16 Press Ganey patient satisfaction questions. The presence of a physician assistant in the clinic positively affected the 5-star rating for all but 1 of the patient satisfaction questions examined, including overall satisfaction (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.03-1.85; P=.031); the likelihood of being recommended to others (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.16-2.14; P=.004); and friendliness/courtesy (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.17-2.13; P=.003). However, having a fellow or nurse practitioner in the clinic, treating children, productivity (measured as total relative value units), taking trauma call, and provider distance from home were not associated with higher scores for any of the Press Ganey patient satisfaction questions. Having a physician assistant in the clinic is an actionable, practice-specific characteristic that positively affects patient satisfaction on many levels and may ultimately improve the perception of care. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(5):e252-e256.].

Ambulatory Surgery Centers Versus Hospital Outpatient Departments for Orthopaedic Surgeries.

The goals of this study were to compare the utilization and costs of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) versus hospital outpatient department (HOPD) for commonly performed outpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures. Commercially insured patients undergoing elective, outpatient orthopaedic surgery were queried using an administrative claims database. We queried the following surgeries: carpal tunnel release, lumbar microdiskectomy, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, knee arthroscopy, arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and bunion repair. Total costs were defined as the sum of all payments for a surgical episode. Professional fees were defined as payments to the primary orthopaedic surgeon and technical fees as all other payments. Comparisons between ASC and HOPD reimbursements were conducted using bivariate statistics and generalized linear models controlling for patient age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index. Among 990,980 cases of outpatient orthopaedic surgery done from 2013 to 2018, the utilization rate of ASCs increased from 31% to 34% across all procedures assessed: compound annual growth rate of 3.3% for lumbar microdiscectomy, 1.8% for knee arthroscopy, 1.4% for anterior cruciate ligament, 1.4% for carpal tunnel release, 1.2% for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and 0.5% for bunion repair (P < 0.001 for all). The average total costs were 26% lower at ASCs than HOPDs (P < 0.001 for each procedure). The average technical fees were 33% lower at ASCs than HOPDs (P < 0.001 for each procedure). Both total costs and technical fees were less for ASCs than HOPDs after controlling for patient age, sex, and Elixhauser comorbidity index (P < 0.001 for each procedure). Over the study period, the mean total costs at HOPDs increased by 2.5% yearly, whereas the mean total costs at ASCs decreased by 0.1% yearly. The average surgeon professional fees declined in both care settings over time. From 2013 to 2018, there was an increase in ASC utilization for common outpatient orthopaedic surgeries. ASCs were overall less costly than HOPDs for outpatient orthopaedic surgeries. IV.

Use of Triggers to Detect Adverse Events After Outpatient Orthopedic Surgery at a Single Ambulatory Surgery Center.

Literature on adverse events (AEs) after outpatient orthopedic surgery is relatively sparse, and efforts to detect, measure, and track AEs after outpatient surgery lag behind those for the inpatient setting. Detection of AEs has traditionally relied on patient safety indicators (from billing data) and self-reporting, but these methods have been shown to have low sensitivity, missing up to 90% of AEs. There is growing recognition that the trigger method, which uses "triggers" as red flags to initiate more detailed chart audits, can serve as a more sensitive alternative to detect AEs. Moreover, the recent widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) can provide faster automated methods for identifying triggers and estimating AE rates. This study evaluates the ability of 6 separate EHR-based triggers to predict AEs after outpatient orthopedic surgery and compares this trigger method with AE self-reporting. Triggers have the potential to decrease postoperative morbidity after outpatient orthopedic surgery and may lead to quality improvement. Further research is needed to qualify triggers as screening tools in the outpatient setting. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(2):116-121.].

Risk Factors for Postoperative Falls in Foot and Ankle Surgery

Category:OtherIntroduction/Purpose:Falls following orthopaedic surgery are a known entity in the healthcare field possessing significant patient morbidity and driving increased healthcare cost. The vast majority of studies have focused on the incidence and risk factors for postoperative falls in the inpatient setting, however, this is in direct contrast to shifts seen toward same-day outpatient orthopaedic surgery over the past decade. It is crucial to better understand the incidence and risk factors for falls in a mixed inpatient and outpatient model. Additionally, no study to date has examined the risk factors for falls after foot and ankle surgery.Methods:A total of 168 patients were administered a questionnaire and interviewed to investigate the incidence of postoperative falls. Patients completed surveys pertaining to fall history pre- and post-operatively, fall risks, current medical status, and use of an ambulatory assist device. Medical records were reviewed. Questionnaires and interviews were completed at 2 week and 6-week post-operative follow up visits. Factors found to be associated with postoperative falls in univariate analysis (p<.05) were included in a binary logistic regression model.Results:Full six-week follow-up was present in 138 patients. A total of 87 (63.0%) females and 51 (37.0%) males with a median age of 52 (21 IQR) and BMI of 32.4 (11 IQR) were included. The total fall incidence in the first six postoperative weeks was 29.7% (41 patients). In multivariate analysis, antidepressant use and VAS score at two weeks postoperatively were independently associated with falls OR 3.6 (95% CI 1.3 - 10.1) and OR 1.3 (95% CI 1.1 -1.5), respectively. The results of other variables included in the model were as follows: The Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Score OR 1.0 (95% CI.87-1.2), total number of medications excluding as needed OR.85 (95% CI.65-1.1), anticonvulsant use OR 1.8 (95% CI.67 - 5.0), and history of falls in the past six months preoperatively 1.6 (.95% CI.44 - 5.7).Conclusion:The high outpatient fall rate in foot and ankle surgery warrants awareness of risk factors. Antidepressant use has been associated with falls, but has not been established as a risk factor for postoperative falls. Surgeons should be aware of the risk of postoperative falls in this patient population. The postoperative VAS score at two weeks was also shown to be independently associated with falls. Adequate postoperative pain control is vital to minimize such falls. This study has identified antidepressant use and postoperative VAS score at two weeks as two independent risk factors for postoperative falls in foot and ankle surgery.

Measurement of value in rotator cuff repair: patient-level value analysis for the 1-year episode of care.

Rotator cuff repair (RCR) is one of the most common elective orthopedic procedures, with predictable indications, techniques, and outcomes. As a result, this surgical procedure is an ideal choice for studying value. The purpose of this study was to perform patient-level value analysis (PLVA) within the setting of RCR over the 1-year episode of care. Included patients (N = 396) underwent RCR between 2009 and 2016 at a single outpatient orthopedic surgery center. The episode of care was defined as 1-year following surgery. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index was collected at both the initial preoperative baseline assessment and the 1-year postoperative mark. The total cost of care was determined using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). Both PLVA and provider-level value analysis were performed. The average TDABC cost of care was derived at $5413.78 ± $727.41 (95% confidence interval, $5341.92-$5485.64). At the patient level, arthroscopic isolated supraspinatus tears yielded the highest value coefficient (0.82; analysis-of-variance F test, P = .01). There was a poor correlation between the change in the 1-year Western Ontario Rotator Cuff score and the TDABC cost of care (r2 = 0.03). Provider-level value analysis demonstrated significant variation between the 8 providers evaluated (P < .01). RCR is one of the most common orthopedic procedures, yet the correlations between cost of care and patient outcomes are unknown. PLVA quantifies the ratio of functional improvement to the TDABC-estimated cost of care at the patient level. This is the first study to apply PLVA over the first-year episode of care. With health care transitioning toward value-based delivery, PLVA offers a quantitative tool to measure the value of individual patient care delivery over the entire episode of care.

Landmark-guided Injections for Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain

<h3>Research Objectives</h3> To investigate patients' degree and duration of pain relief from landmark-guided injections without fluoroscopy or image-guidance for the treatment of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. <h3>Design</h3> A retrospective cohort study was conducted to examine patients' degree and duration of SIJ pain relief from landmark-guided injections. Patients' self-reported measures to the provider's common follow-up questions were assessed in the electronic medical record from their follow-up visits. <h3>Setting</h3> An out-patient orthopedic spine surgery clinic. <h3>Participants</h3> 311 patients identified as having SIJ pain that received at least one landmark-guided injection were reviewed. Four patients with a history of image-guided or fluoroscopy-guided SIJ injections were excluded. <h3>Interventions</h3> The SIJ was palpated and a landmark-guided, periarticular injection consisting of an anesthetic agent and corticosteroid was administered with a 22-gauge needle without image or fluoroscopy guidance. The patient was prepped using an aseptic technique and ethyl chloride. <h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3> The primary outcomes included the duration of relief recorded in weeks and the degree of relief recorded as a percentage. Secondary outcomes included reported adverse side effects. Covariates of interest including age, smoking status, BMI, reason for pain onset, and sex were collected for further comparative analysis. <h3>Results</h3> Of these 311 patients included in this review, 191 patients returned for follow-ups with reports of duration and degree of pain relief. The average length of relief reported was 8.88 weeks. The average percent relief reported was 53.55%. Reported adverse side effects included: increased low back pain, an irregular menstrual cycle, and vaginal bleeding unrelated to menstruation. No other adverse side effects were reported. No comparisons between outcomes and covariates were statistically significant. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Landmark-guided SIJ injections are a reasonable and safe treatment option for SIJ pain, as our patient population had on average greater than 50% sustained relief for over 2 months. This treatment option is a more affordable and accessible option that can be done quickly in the clinic as compared to the gold-standard approach of fluoroscopically-guided SIJ Injections. A prospective, controlled study of the efficacy of these injections is underway at our institution. Other future research should investigate patients' degree and length of relief from subsequent landmark-guided injections. <h3>Author(s) Disclosures</h3> No conflicts to report.

Unplanned Emergency and Urgent Care Visits After Outpatient Orthopaedic Surgery.

IntroductionThis study sought to determine (1) incident risk, (2) chief report, (3) risk factors, and (4) total cost of unplanned healthcare visits to an emergency and/or urgent care (ED/UC) facility within 30 days of an outpatient orthopaedic procedure.MethodsThis was a retrospective database review of 5,550 outpatient surgical encounters from a large metropolitan healthcare system between 2012 and 2016. Statistical analysis consisted of measuring the ED/UC incident risk, respective to the procedures and anatomical region. Patient-specific risk factors were evaluated through multigroup comparative statistics.ResultsOf the 5,550 study patients, 297 (5.4%) presented to an ED/UC within 30 days of their index procedure, with 23 (0.4%) needing to be readmitted. Native English speakers, patients older than 45 years, and nonsmokers had significant reduced relative risk of unplanned ED or UC visit within 30 days of index procedure (P < 0.01). In addition, hand tendon repair/graft had the greatest risk incidence for ED/UC visit (11.0%). Unplanned ED/UC reimbursements totaled $146,357.34, averaging $575.65 per visit.DiscussionThis study provides an evaluation of outpatient orthopaedic procedures and their relationship to ED/UC visits. Specifically, this study identifies patient-related and procedural-related attributes that associate with an increased risk for unplanned healthcare utilization.

The effect of regional anesthesia blocks on post-operative pain after ambulatory orthopedic trauma surgery.

To determine if regional anesthesia had added benefit to general anesthesia, with or without local anesthesia, in controlling post-operative pain in outpatient orthopedic trauma surgery. A retrospective review was performed of prospectively gathered data on 71 patients undergoing outpatient orthopedic trauma surgery. All patients received general anesthesia and an addition 52 patients received additional regional anesthesia. Regional vs. no regional anesthesia groups were compared in terms of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) pain visual analog scores (VAS), PACU length of stay (LOS), opioid use, and pain control at two weeks. The regional anesthesia group not differ in demographics or proportion of patients receiving local anesthesia, but was less likely to be undergoing major procedures (13% vs. 37%, proportional difference (PD) -23%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -46% to -0.4%). There were no detectable differences in PACU opioid requirements (median difference (MD) -7.5mg, CI -8 to 0), PACU LOS (MD -13min, CI -63 to 24), discharge pain VAS (MD 0, CI -1 to 1), post-discharge pain VAS (MD 0, CI -1 to 1), opioid refills (PD -6%, CI -31% to 18%), or patient-perceived pain control (PD -24%, CI -41% to 0%). On multivariate analysis, regional anesthesia was the only variable negatively associated with patient-perceived pain control at two weeks (Odds Ratio 0.15; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.8). Regional anesthesia did not improve post-operative opioid requirements, PACU LOS, or patient-reported pain in the immediate or short-term post-operative period.