Cargando…

Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric intertrochanteric (IT) femur fractures are a common and costly injury, expected to increase in incidence as the population ages. Understanding cost drivers will be essential for risk adjustments, and the surgeon’s choice of implant may be an opportunity to reduce the overall...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Casnovsky, Lauren, Blaschke, Breanna L, Parikh, Harsh R, Flagstad, Ilexa, Wise, Kelsey, McMilan, Logan J, Gorman, Tiffany, Okelana, A. Bandele, Horst, Patrick, Cunningham, Brian P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7503001/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32995066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2151459320959005
_version_ 1783584306731417600
author Casnovsky, Lauren
Blaschke, Breanna L
Parikh, Harsh R
Flagstad, Ilexa
Wise, Kelsey
McMilan, Logan J
Gorman, Tiffany
Okelana, A. Bandele
Horst, Patrick
Cunningham, Brian P
author_facet Casnovsky, Lauren
Blaschke, Breanna L
Parikh, Harsh R
Flagstad, Ilexa
Wise, Kelsey
McMilan, Logan J
Gorman, Tiffany
Okelana, A. Bandele
Horst, Patrick
Cunningham, Brian P
author_sort Casnovsky, Lauren
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Geriatric intertrochanteric (IT) femur fractures are a common and costly injury, expected to increase in incidence as the population ages. Understanding cost drivers will be essential for risk adjustments, and the surgeon’s choice of implant may be an opportunity to reduce the overall cost of care. This study was purposed to identify the relationship between implant type and inpatient cost of care for isolated geriatric IT fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review of IT fractures from 2013-2017 was performed at an academic level I trauma center. Construct type and AO/OTA fracture classifications were obtained radiographically, and patient variables were collected via the electronic medical record (EMR). The total cost of care was obtained via time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). Multivariable linear regression and goodness-of-fit analyses were used to determine correlation between implant costs, inpatient cost of care, construct type, patient characteristics, and injury characteristics. RESULTS: Implant costs ranged from $765.17 to $5,045.62, averaging $2,699, and were highest among OTA 31-A3 fracture patterns (p < 0.01). Implant cost had a positive linear association with overall inpatient cost of care (p < 0.01), but remained highly variable (r(2) = 0.16). Total cost of care ranged from $9,129.18 to $64,210.70, averaging $19,822, and patients receiving a sliding hip screw (SHS) had the lowest mean total cost of care at $17,077, followed by short and long intramedullary nails ($19,314 and $21,372, respectively). When construct type and fracture pattern were compared to total cost, 31-A1 fracture pattern treated with SHS had significantly lower cost than 31-A2 and 31-A3 and less variation in cost. CONCLUSION: The cost of care for IT fractures is poorly understood and difficult to determine. With alternative payment models on the horizon, implant selection should be utilized as an opportunity to decrease costs and increase the value of care provided to patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7503001
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75030012020-09-28 Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures? Casnovsky, Lauren Blaschke, Breanna L Parikh, Harsh R Flagstad, Ilexa Wise, Kelsey McMilan, Logan J Gorman, Tiffany Okelana, A. Bandele Horst, Patrick Cunningham, Brian P Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil Hip Fracture Care for 2020: Best Care, Best Value INTRODUCTION: Geriatric intertrochanteric (IT) femur fractures are a common and costly injury, expected to increase in incidence as the population ages. Understanding cost drivers will be essential for risk adjustments, and the surgeon’s choice of implant may be an opportunity to reduce the overall cost of care. This study was purposed to identify the relationship between implant type and inpatient cost of care for isolated geriatric IT fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review of IT fractures from 2013-2017 was performed at an academic level I trauma center. Construct type and AO/OTA fracture classifications were obtained radiographically, and patient variables were collected via the electronic medical record (EMR). The total cost of care was obtained via time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). Multivariable linear regression and goodness-of-fit analyses were used to determine correlation between implant costs, inpatient cost of care, construct type, patient characteristics, and injury characteristics. RESULTS: Implant costs ranged from $765.17 to $5,045.62, averaging $2,699, and were highest among OTA 31-A3 fracture patterns (p < 0.01). Implant cost had a positive linear association with overall inpatient cost of care (p < 0.01), but remained highly variable (r(2) = 0.16). Total cost of care ranged from $9,129.18 to $64,210.70, averaging $19,822, and patients receiving a sliding hip screw (SHS) had the lowest mean total cost of care at $17,077, followed by short and long intramedullary nails ($19,314 and $21,372, respectively). When construct type and fracture pattern were compared to total cost, 31-A1 fracture pattern treated with SHS had significantly lower cost than 31-A2 and 31-A3 and less variation in cost. CONCLUSION: The cost of care for IT fractures is poorly understood and difficult to determine. With alternative payment models on the horizon, implant selection should be utilized as an opportunity to decrease costs and increase the value of care provided to patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV. SAGE Publications 2020-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7503001/ /pubmed/32995066 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2151459320959005 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Hip Fracture Care for 2020: Best Care, Best Value
Casnovsky, Lauren
Blaschke, Breanna L
Parikh, Harsh R
Flagstad, Ilexa
Wise, Kelsey
McMilan, Logan J
Gorman, Tiffany
Okelana, A. Bandele
Horst, Patrick
Cunningham, Brian P
Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title_full Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title_fullStr Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title_full_unstemmed Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title_short Does Implant Selection Affect the Inpatient Cost of Care for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures?
title_sort does implant selection affect the inpatient cost of care for geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures?
topic Hip Fracture Care for 2020: Best Care, Best Value
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7503001/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32995066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2151459320959005
work_keys_str_mv AT casnovskylauren doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT blaschkebreannal doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT parikhharshr doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT flagstadilexa doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT wisekelsey doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT mcmilanloganj doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT gormantiffany doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT okelanaabandele doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT horstpatrick doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures
AT cunninghambrianp doesimplantselectionaffecttheinpatientcostofcareforgeriatricintertrochantericfemurfractures