The Cost of Quarantine: Projecting the Financial Impact of Canceled Elective Surgery on the Nation's Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify the financial impact of elective surgery cancellations in the US during COVID-19 and simulate hospitals' recovery times from a single period of surgery cessation. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 in the US resulted in cessation of elective surgery-a substantial driver of hospital revenue-and placed patients at risk and hospitals under financial stress. We sought to quantify the financial impact of elective surgery cancellations during the pandemic and simulate hospitals' recovery times. METHODS: Elective surgical cases were abstracted from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2016-2017). Time series were utilized to forecast March-May 2020 revenues and demand. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to calculate the time to clear backlog cases and match expected ongoing demand in the post-COVID period. Subset analyses were performed by hospital region and teaching status. RESULTS: National revenue loss due to major elective surgery cessation was estimated to be $22.3 billion (B). Recovery to market equilibrium was conserved across strata and influenced by pre- and post-COVID capacity utilization. Median recovery time was 12-22 months across all strata. Lower pre-COVID utilization was associated with fewer months to recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to mitigate the predicted revenue loss of $22.3B due to major elective surgery cessation will vary with hospital-specific supply-demand equilibrium. If patient demand is slow to return, hospitals should focus on marketing of services; if hospital capacity is constrained, efficient capacity expansion may be beneficial. Finally, rural and urban nonteaching hospitals may face increased financial risk which may exacerbate care disparities.

Elective versus nonelective brain tumor resections: a 5-year propensity score matching cost comparison analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Elective surgical cases generally have lower costs, higher profit margins, and better outcomes than nonelective cases. Investigating the differences in cost and profit between elective and nonelective cases would help hospitals in planning strategies to withstand financial losses due to potential pandemics. The authors sought to evaluate the exact cost and profit margin differences between elective and nonelective supratentorial tumor resections at a single institution. METHODS: The authors collected economic analysis data in all patients who underwent supratentorial tumor resection at their institution between January 2014 and December 2018. The patients were grouped into elective and nonelective cases. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for heterogeneity of baseline characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: There were 143 elective cases and 232 nonelective cases over the 5 years. Patients in the majority of elective cases had private insurance and in the majority of nonelective cases the patients had Medicare/Medicaid (p < 0.01). The total charges were significantly lower for elective cases ($168,800.12) compared to nonelective cases ($254,839.30, p < 0.01). The profit margins were almost 6 times higher for elective than for nonelective cases ($13,025.28 vs $2,128.01, p = 0.04). After propensity score matching, there was still a significant difference between total charges and total cost. CONCLUSIONS: Elective supratentorial tumor resections were associated with significantly lower costs with shorter lengths of stay while also being roughly 6 times more profitable than nonelective cases. These findings may help future planning for hospital strategies to survive financial losses during future pandemics that require widespread cancellation of elective cases.

Resource requirements for reintroducing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 response required the cancellation of all but the most urgent surgical procedures. The number of cancelled surgical procedures owing to Covid-19, and the reintroduction of surgical acivirt, was modelled. METHODS: This was a modelling study using Hospital Episode Statistics data (2014-2019). Surgical procedures were grouped into four urgency classes. Expected numbers of surgical procedures performed between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021 were modelled. Procedure deficit was estimated using conservative assumptions and the gradual reintroduction of elective surgery from the 1 June 2020. Costs were calculated using NHS reference costs and are reported as millions or billions of euros. Estimates are reported with 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 4 547 534 (95 per cent c.i. 3 318 195 to 6 250 771) patients with a pooled mean age of 53.5 years were expected to undergo surgery between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021. By 31 May 2020, 749 247 (513 564 to 1 077 448) surgical procedures had been cancelled. Assuming that elective surgery is reintroduced gradually, 2 328 193 (1 483 834 - 3 450 043) patients will be awaiting surgery by 28 February 2021. The cost of delayed procedures is €5.3 (3.1 to 8.0) billion. Safe delivery of surgery during the pandemic will require substantial extra resources costing €526.8 (449.3 to 633.9) million. CONCLUSION: As a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, provision of elective surgery will be delayed and associated with increased healthcare costs.

The Impact of Halting Elective Admissions in Anticipation of a Demand Surge Due to the Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: In anticipation of a demand surge for hospital beds attributed to the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) many US states have mandated that hospitals postpone elective admissions. OBJECTIVES: To estimate excess demand for hospital beds due to COVID-19, the net financial impact of eliminating elective admissions in order to meet demand, and to explore the scenario when demand remains below capacity. RESEARCH DESIGN: An economic simulation to estimate the net financial impact of halting elective admissions, combining epidemiological reports, the US Census, American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the National Inpatient Sample. Deterministic sensitivity analyses explored the results while varying assumptions for demand and capacity. SUBJECTS: Inputs regarding disease prevalence and inpatient utilization were representative of the US population. Our base case relied on a hospital admission rate reported by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention of 137.6 per 100,000, with the highest rates in people aged 65 years and older (378.8 per 100,000) and 50-64 years (207.4 per 100,000). On average, elective admissions accounted for 20% of total hospital admissions, and the average rate of unoccupied beds across hospitals was 30%. MEASURES: Net financial impact of halting elective admissions. RESULTS: On average, hospitals COVID-19 demand for hospital bed-days fell well short of hospital capacity, resulting in a substantial financial loss. The net financial impact of a 90-day COVID surge on a hospital was only favorable under a narrow circumstance when capacity was filled by a high proportion of COVID-19 cases among hospitals with low rates of elective admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals that restricted elective care took on a substantial financial risk, potentially threatening viability. A sustainable public policy should therefore consider support to hospitals that responsibly served their communities through the crisis.

Balancing revenue generation with capacity generation: case distribution, financial impact and hospital capacity changes from cancelling or resuming elective surgeries in the US during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To increase bed capacity and resources, hospitals have postponed elective surgeries, although the financial impact of this decision is unknown. We sought to report elective surgical case distribution, associated gross hospital revenue and regional hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) bed capacity as elective surgical cases are cancelled and then resumed under simulated trends of COVID-19 incidence. METHODS: A retrospective, cohort analysis was performed using insurance claims from 161 million enrollees from the MarketScan database from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017. COVID-19 cases were calculated using Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation models. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports on the number of hospitalized and intensive care patients by age estimated the number of cases seen in the ICU, the reduction in elective surgeries and the financial impact of this from historic claims data, using a denominator of all inpatient revenue and outpatient surgeries. RESULTS: Assuming 5% infection prevalence, cancelling all elective procedures decreases ICU overcapacity from 160 to 130%, but these elective surgical cases contribute 78% (IQR 74, 80) (1.1 trillion (T) US dollars) to inpatient hospital plus outpatient surgical gross revenue per year. Musculoskeletal, circulatory and digestive category elective surgical cases compose 33% ($447B) of total revenue. CONCLUSIONS: Procedures involving the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular and digestive system account for the largest loss of hospital gross revenue when elective surgery is postponed. As hospital bed capacity increases following the COVID-19 pandemic, restoring volume of these elective cases will help maintain revenue. In these estimates, adopting universal masking would help to avoid overcapacity in all states.

COVID-19 and the Case for Medical Management and Primary Care.

Hospitals and health systems suffer an over-reliance on elective surgeries to remain profitable. As a result, systems report record losses, while demand for emergency room, hospital, and intensive care beds have surged. Studies have admitted that many surgeries are unnecessary, and physician leaders admit that profit plays a role in driving such needless cost and risk. Most diseases are better managed with medications and lifestyle changes. But it pays more to replace a knee than to prevent that replacement. We must bring surgical and medical value closer in-line. Communities of color are suffering disproportionately from coronavirus. The social determinants of health that lead to higher concentrations of hypertension and diabetes can be mitigated by investment in primary care. Such investment has been proven to decrease cost and increase quality of life. However, the United States spends 50% less on primary care, than other developed countries. While showing promise, telehealth is not a panacea. It relies on continued reimbursement parity, and there remains a digital divide. Any meaningful fix will draw the ire from those who profit from such a profligate system. If we want to improve quality, access and equity, while avoiding unnecessary hospitalizations, risky surgeries, and runaway costs, we must invest in primary care.

Economic implications of decreased elective orthopaedic and musculoskeletal surgery volume during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

PURPOSE: In order to reduce viral spread, elective surgery was cancelled in most US hospitals for an extended period during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to estimate national hospital reimbursement and net income losses due to elective orthopaedic surgery cancellation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample (NASS) were used to identify all elective orthopaedic and musculoskeletal (MSK) surgery performed in the inpatient setting and in hospital owned outpatient surgery departments throughout the USA. Total cost, reimbursement, and net income were estimated for all elective orthopaedic surgery and were compared with elective operations from other specialties. RESULTS: Elective MSK surgery accounted for $65.6-$71.1 billion in reimbursement and $15.6-$21.1 billion in net income per year to the US hospital system, equivalent to $5.5-$5.9 billion in reimbursement and $1.3-$1.8 billion in net income per month. When compared with elective surgery from all other specialties, elective MSK surgery accounted for 39% of hospital reimbursement and 35% of hospital net income. Compared with all hospital encounters for all specialties, elective MSK surgery accounted for 13% of reimbursement and 23% of net income. Estimated hospital losses from cancellation of elective MSK surgery during 8 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic were $10.9-$11.9 billion in reimbursement and $2.6-3.5 billion in net income. CONCLUSION: Cancellation of elective MSK surgery for 8 weeks during the COVID-19 pandemic has substantial economic implications on the US hospital system.

The Financial Impacts of the COVID-19 Crisis on the Practices of Cosmetic/Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons.

The global pandemic of coronavirus 2019, or COVID-19, has undeniably impacted all facets of healthcare, affecting both its function and provision. Due to the cessation of all non-emergent surgical cases in the USA and worldwide, the professional lives and practices of many physicians have been negatively affected. However, among different physicians and specifically plastic surgeons, cosmetic/aesthetic plastic surgeons have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic as the majority of their cases are semi-elective and elective. The ability to perform semi-elective and elective cases is dependent on state and local authorities' regulations, and it is currently uncertain when the ban, if ever, will be completely lifted. Financial constraints on patients and their future inability to pay for these procedures due to the COVID-19-related economic recession are things to consider. Overall, the goal of this unprecedented time for cosmetic/aesthetic plastic surgeons is for their medical practices to survive, to conserve cash flow although income is low to none, and to maintain their personal finances. In this paper, the authors review the financial impacts of the current COVID-19 pandemic on the practices of cosmetic plastic surgeons in the USA and worldwide, along with some potential approaches to maintain their practices and financial livelihoods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The likely economic impact of fewer elective surgical procedures on US hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To help control the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, elective procedures have been cancelled in most US hospitals by government order. The purpose of this study is to estimate national hospital reimbursement and net income losses owing to elective surgical procedure cancellation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample and the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample were used to identify all elective surgical procedures performed in the inpatient setting and in hospital-owned outpatient surgery departments throughout the United States. Total cost, reimbursement, and net income was determined for all elective surgical procedures. RESULTS: The estimated total annual cost of elective inpatient and outpatient surgical procedures in the United States was $147.2 billion, and estimated total hospital reimbursement was $195.4 to $212.2 billion. This resulted in a net income of $48.0 to $64.8 billion per year to the US hospital system. Cancellation of all elective procedures would result in estimated losses of $16.3 to $17.7 billion per month in revenue and $4 to $5.4 billion per month in net income to US hospitals. CONCLUSION: Cancellation of elective procedures during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has a substantial economic impact on the US hospital system.

Surgical, Economic, and Psychological Impacts of SARS-COV-2 on a Kansas Community Hospital System.

The chief of surgery of a 264-bed acute care facility and clinic system in Topeka, KS, USA, gives a chronology that illustrates the rapid and profound clinical, economic, and emotional impact of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak on his hospital and community. In his view, the pandemic has laid bare the weaknesses of several factors basic to the modern US health care system and the resulting economic crisis: just-in-time supply chain technology; foreign sourcing of masks, gowns, and critical equipment, all at critical shortages during the crisis; rural hospital closings; lack of excess capacity through maximization of utilization for efficiency; and an overreliance on high revenue elective procedures and tests. His team was tested by an emergency operation for bowel obstruction that put all the isolation protocols into action. Despite their readiness and the success of the operation and the potential for telemedicine as an alternative to in-person evaluations and outpatient visits, the forced cancellation of all elective operations have led to the loss of revenue for both hospital system and providers, furlough and termination of workers, and financial hardship and uncertainty.

Are cost advantages from a modern Indian hospital transferable to the United States?

BACKGROUND: Multiple modern Indian hospitals operate at very low cost while meeting US-equivalent quality accreditation standards. Though US hospitals face intensifying pressure to lower their cost, including proposals to extend Medicare payment rates to all admissions, the transferability of Indian hospitals' cost advantages to US peers remains unclear. METHODS: Using time-driven activity-based costing methods, we estimate the average cost of personnel and space for an elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery at two American hospitals and one Indian hospital (NH). All three hospitals are Joint Commission accredited and have reputations for use of modern performance management methods. Our case study applies several analytic steps to distinguish transferable from non-transferable sources of NH's cost savings. RESULTS: After removing non-transferable sources of efficiency, NH's residual cost advantage primarily rests on shifting tasks to less-credentialed and/or less-experienced personnel who are supervised by highly-skilled personnel when perceived risk of complications is low. NH's high annual CABG volume facilitates such supervised work "downshifting." The study is subject to limitations inherent in case studies, does not account for the younger age of NH's patients, or capture savings attributable to NH's negligible frequency of re-admission or post-acute care facility placement. CONCLUSIONS: Most transferable bases for a modern Indian hospital's cost advantage would require more flexible American states' hospital and health professional licensing regulations, greater family participation in inpatient care, and stronger support by hospital executives and clinicians for substantially lowering the cost of care via regionalization of complex surgeries and weekend use of costly operating rooms.

Surgical wait list management in Canada during a pandemic: many challenges ahead.

Summary: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a massive impact on waits for elective operations, with tens of thousands of scheduled surgeries being cancelled or postponed across Canada. Provincial governments will likely not only reopen elective surgical capacity when it is deemed safe, but also target new funding to address the backlog of cases. There is a dearth of research on whether the provinces' approaches to managing wait lists are equitable from a patients' needs perspective or if they are associated with patients' perception of outcomes. The surgical cost models used in the past won't be useful to governments and hospital managers. New models based on hospitals' marginal costs, associated with running on weekends or off-hours and social distancing parameters, will be needed. Surgeon input, collaboration and leadership during the strategy development, implementation and management of surgical wait lists postpandemic will be imperative, as these decisions will significantly affect the health and lives of many Canadians.

Economic Recovery After the COVID-19 Pandemic: Resuming Elective Orthopedic Surgery and Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The economic effects of the COVID-19 crisis are not like anything the U.S. health care system has ever experienced. METHODS: As we begin to emerge from the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we need to plan the sustainable resumption of elective procedures. We must first ensure the safety of our patients and surgical staff. It must be a priority to monitor the availability of supplies for the continued care of patients suffering from COVID-19. As we resume elective orthopedic surgery and total joint arthroplasty, we must begin to reduce expenses by renegotiating vendor contracts, use ambulatory surgery centers and hospital outpatient departments in a safe and effective manner, adhere to strict evidence-based and COVID-19-adjusted practices, and incorporate telemedicine and other technology platforms when feasible for health care systems and orthopedic groups to survive economically. RESULTS: The return to normalcy will be slow and may be different than what we are accustomed to, but we must work together to plan a transition to a more sustainable health care reality which accommodates a COVID-19 world. CONCLUSION: Our goal should be using these lessons to achieve a healthy and successful 2021 fiscal year.

COVID-19 financial resources for physicians.

The appropriate focus in managing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has been addressing access and delivery of care to the population affected by the outbreak. All sectors of the U.S. economy have been significantly affected, including physicians. Physician groups of all specialties and sizes have experienced the financial effects of the pandemic. Hospitals have received billions of dollars to support and enable them to manage emergencies and cover the costs of the disruption. However, many vascular surgeons are under great financial pressure because of the postponement of all nonemergency procedures. The federal government has announced a myriad of programs in the form of grants and loans to reimburse physicians for some of their expenses and loss of revenue. It is more than likely that unless the public health emergency subsides significantly, many practices will experience dire consequences without additional financial assistance. We have attempted to provide a concise listing of such programs and resources available to assist vascular surgeons who are small businesses in accessing these opportunities.