Search

Background: As the opioid crisis has gained national attention, there have been increasing efforts to decrease opioid usage. Simultaneously, patient satisfaction has been a crucial metric in the American health care system and has been closely linked to effective pain management in surgical patients. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of pain medication prescription and concurrent patient satisfaction in spine surgery patients. Methods: A total of 1729 patients undergoing spine surgery between June 25, 2017, and June 30, 2018, at a single institution by surgeons performing ≥20 surgeries per quarter, with medication data during hospitalization available, were assessed. Patients were evaluated for nonopioid pain medication prescription rates and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of opioids used during hospitalization. Of the total cohort, 198 patients were evaluated for Press Ganey Satisfaction Survey responses. A χ2 test of independence was used to compare percentages, and 1-way analysis of variance was used to compare means across quarters. Results: The mean total MME per patient hospitalization was 574.46, with no difference between quarters. However, mean MME per day decreased over time (P = .048), with highest mean 91.84 in Quarter 2 and lowest 77.50 in Quarter 4. Among all procedures, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and steroid prescription rates increased, whereas benzodiazepine and γ-aminobutyric acid–analog prescriptions decreased. There were no significant differences between quarters for mean hospital ratings (P = .521) nor for responses to questions from the Press Ganey Satisfaction Survey regarding how often staff talk about pain (P = .164), how often staff talk about pain treatment (P = .595), or whether patients recommended the hospital (P = .096). There were also no differences between quarters for responses in all other patient satisfaction questions (P value range, .359–.988). Conclusions: Over the studied time period, opioid use decreased and nonopioid prescriptions increased during hospitalization, whereas satisfaction scores remained unchanged. These findings indicate an increasing effort in reducing opioid use among providers and suggest the ability to do so without affecting overall satisfaction rates. Level of Evidence: 4. Clinical Relevance: The opioid epidemic has highlighted the need to reduce opioid usage in orthopedic spine surgery. This study reviews the trends for inpatient management of post-op pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients in relation to patient satisfaction. There was a significant increase in non-opioid analgesic pain medications, and a reduction in opioids during the study period. During this time, patient satisfaction as measured by Press-Ganey surveys did not show a decrease. This demonstrates that treatment of post-operative pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients can be managed with less opioids, more multimodal analgesia, and patient satisfaction will not be affected.

BACKGROUND: Spine surgery is associated with significant intraoperative blood loss, often leading to transfusion. Patients who receive transfusions have an increased length of stay and risk of perioperative complications. To decrease the transfusion rate, we implemented an evidence-based institution-wide restrictive transfusion blood management guideline. The goal of this study is to describe the impact of this guideline on our spine surgery patients. METHODS: We analyzed the incidence of transfusion following 3709 single-institution, inpatient spine procedures before and after implementation of a revised blood transfusion protocol. The baseline period (1742 patients) from January 2014 to March 2015 was compared to the study period (1967 patients) of April 2015 to July 2016. One patient was excluded because of incomplete medical records. The revised protocol included establishing a postoperative blood transfusion trigger at hemoglobin 7g/dL decreased to 4.9% from 6.1% (P = .09). The rate of transfusions with a prior hemoglobin test increased from 42.0% to 59.1% (P

Background: The relaxation of telemedicine (TM) restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated adoption of this technology by many orthopedic practices. The purpose of this study was to exam...

Background In an effort to control cost and increase value, Medicare is transitioning from fee-for-service to value-based alternative payment models (APMs). The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative represents one such voluntary APM. BPCI offers four different bundling options: model 1 covers all Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs) and Models 2–4 cover 48 clinical episodes, including 186 separate DRGs. Questions/Purposes The purpose of this investigation is to analyze and compare the cost savings achieved by two different BPCI program participants, provider A and provider B, enrolled in different models of BPCI (Models 2 and 3) for lower extremity joint replacements (LEJRs). Methods We analyzed the BPCI cost savings for Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs) 469 and 470 (lower extremity joint replacement) of two different BPCI program participants. One (provider A) participated in Model 2 while the other (provider B) participated in Model 3. Retrospective payments were based upon savings generated by decreased actual expenses reconciled against target pricing for the episode of care in Models 2 and 3. Results The Model 2 participant reduced the average cost of all episodes by 18.45%, with all of the savings occurring in the post acute phase. The Model 3 participant reduced episode costs by 16.73%. Conclusion Both BPCI providers achieved similar cost savings despite participating in different BPCI models. These cost savings all occurred in the post acute setting. The Model 2 provider achieved post acute savings through decreasing overall discharges to institutional post acute care (PAC) providers and decreasing readmissions, while the Model 3 provider decreased costs largely by decreasing the LOS for the institutional PAC providers and decreasing readmissions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11420-017-9571-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The indications for vancomycin prophylaxis to prevent Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) surgical site infections are increasing. The recommended dose of vancomycin has traditionally been 1 gram intravenous. However, the increasing prevalence of obesity in our population coupled with increasing resistance of MRSA to vancomycin has resulted in recent recommendations for weight-based dosing of vancomycin at 15 mg/kg. We hypothesize that the standard one gram dose of vancomycin is inadequate to meet the recently recommended dosage of 15 mg/kg.We performed a retrospective chart review on 216 patients who were screened positive for MRSA prior to undergoing elective total joint or spine surgeries between January 2009 to January 2012. All patients were given 1 gram of vancomycin within an hour prior to surgical incision as prophylaxis. Using the revised dosing protocol of 15 mg/kg of body weight for vancomycin, proper dosage was calculated for each patient. These values were then compared to the 1 gram dose given to the patients at time of surgery. Patients were assessed as either underdosed (a calculated weight-based dose1 gram) or overdosed (a calculated weight-based dose1 gram). Additionally, we used actual case times and pharmacokinetic equations to determine the vancomycin (VAN) levels at the end of the procedures.Out of 216 patients who tested positive for MRSA, 149 patients (69%) were determined to be underdosed and 22 patients (10%) patients were determined to be overdosed. The predicted VAN level at the end of procedure was15 mg/L in 60% of patients with 1 gram dose compared to 12% (p=0.0005) with weight base dose. Six patients developed post-operative MRSA surgical site infections (SSI). Of these six patients; four had strains of MRSA with vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration of1.0 mg/L. Based on 1 g dosing, 5/6 patients with MRSA positive SSIs had wound closure levels of15 mg/L and all six were20 mg/L.In settings such as hospitals, where the risk for resistant bacteria, especially MRSA, is high, it is becoming increasingly important to accurately dose patients who require vancomycin. In order to avoid incorrect dosing of vancomycin health care providers must use weight-based dosing.

Hospital-acquired infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are a source of morbidity and mortality. S. aureus is the most common pathogen in prosthetic joint infections and the incidence of MRSA is increasing.The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the MRSA prevalence density rate at a specialty orthopaedic hospital before and after the implementation of a screening and decolonization protocol,(2) to compare our prevalence density to that of an affiliated university hospital, to control for changes in MRSA prevalence density that might have been independent of the decolonization protocol, and (3) to measure the admission prevalence density rate of MRSA in an elective orthopaedic surgery population and the compliance rate of 26 patients with the protocol [corrected].In October 2008, we implemented a MRSA screening and decolonization protocol for patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery. Nasal swabs were used for screening and mupirocin nasal ointment and chlorhexidine skin antisepsis where prescribed for decolonization to all patients. At the surgical visit, compliance was measured and the patients who were MRSA positive received vancomycin for antibiotic prophylaxis. Institution wide surveillance for multidrug-resistant organisms, including MRSA provided a comparison of the change in MRSA burden at the orthopaedic hospital versus the university hospital.Before implementation of the preoperative staphylococcal decolonization protocol there were 79 MRSA-positive cultures in 64,327 patient-days for a prevalence density rate of 1.23 per 1000 patient-days. After protocol implementation, 53 MRSA-positive cultures were identified in 63,860 patient-days for a rate of 0.83 per 1000 patient-days. Before the protocol, the MRSA prevalence density at the specialty hospital was similar to that of the university hospital; after implementation of the protocol, the prevalence density at the specialty hospital was 33% lower than that of the university hospital. The MRSA admission prevalence was 3.02%. The compliance rate was greater than 95%.Implementation of a staphylococcal decolonization protocol at a single specialty orthopaedic hospital decreased the prevalence density of MRSA.

The episode-of-care concept promulgated by the federal government requires hospitals to assume the cost burden for all care rendered up to 30 days after discharge, including all readmissions occurring in that time. Although surgical site infections (SSIs) are a leading cause of readmission after total joint arthroplasties (TJA) and spine surgery, it is unclear whether these readmissions occur relative to the 30-day period. We determined whether (1) most readmissions for SSIs occurred in 30 days, (2) the type of procedure performed affected the timing of readmission, and (3) the type of infecting organism influenced the timing of readmission. From our hospital database we identified 91 patients treated with elective TJAs and spine surgery from 2007 through 2010 who were readmitted with SSIs. Of the 91 patients, 46 had undergone spine surgery and 45 had TJAs. For each of these readmissions, we determined the type of surgery, the length of time from initial discharge to readmission, and the type of infecting organism. Readmissions after spine surgery were more likely to occur within 30 days of discharge (80.4% for spine, 58.3% for TJAs). In the TJA cohort, there was a trend toward readmissions occurring within 30 days of discharge more often in the THA subset. We identified no correlation between type of infecting organism and timing of readmission. With the episode-of-care model, SSIs pose a substantial cost burden for hospitals since the majority would be included in the 30-day period included in the bundled reimbursement.

Although the effect of Staphylococcus aureus (SA) decolonization on surgical site infection (SSI) rates has been studied, patient tolerance and acceptance of these regimens has not been assessed. Surgical patients at our hospital's Pre-Admission Testing Clinic (PAT) receive SA reduction protocols instructing the preoperative use of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) soap and intranasal mupirocin ointment (MO). Certain insurers do not cover MO costs resulting in out of pocket (OOP) expenses for some patients.This study assessed patient attitudes and compliance with our hospital's SA decolonization regimen.One-hundred-forty-six patients received surveys. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.Of respondents fitting inclusion criteria, 81% followed the MO protocol (MO users) while 89% followed the CHG protocol (CHG users). Fifty-four percent of MO users reported OOP expenses and 13% reported a hard or very hard financial burden. Ninety-three percent of CHG users reported the protocol was easy or very easy to follow.Eighty-one percent of patients receiving the SA protocol were fully compliant despite cost or difficulty obtaining MO. Given these barriers and some difficulty with CHG application, we hypothesize compliance may be improved if MO is provided to patients without OOP expenses and if the CHG application method is simplified.

We investigated the effects of implementation of an institution-wide screening and decolonization protocol on the rates of deep surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing primary knee and hip arthroplasties. 2058 patients were enrolled in this study: 1644 patients in the treatment group and 414 in the control group. The treatment group attended preoperative admission testing (PAT) clinic where they were screened for MSSA and MRSA colonization. All patients were provided a 5-day course of nasal mupirocin and a single preoperative chlorhexidine shower. Additionally, patients colonized with MRSA received Vancomycin perioperative prophylaxis. The control group did not attend PAT nor receive mupirocin treatment and received either Ancef or Clindamycin for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. There were a total of 6 deep infections in the control group (1.45%) and 21 in the treatment group (1.28%); this represented a decrease of 13% () in the treatment versus control group. This decrease represented a positive trend in favor of staphylococcus screening, decolonization with mupirocin, and perioperative Vancomycin for known MRSA carriers.

The online version of the original article can be found under doi:10.1007/s11999-013-2848-3.