Lack of a substantive effect of insurance and the national US payment system on the relative distribution of surgical cases among hospitals in the State of Iowa: A retrospective, observational, cohort study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to quantify the extent to which the distribution of patients among payers and changes to the payers' policies has influenced the market of surgery among hospitals in a relatively rural state. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Iowa Hospital Association data analyzed were from 2007 through 2016 for the N = 121 hospitals with at least one case performed that included a major therapeutic procedure. MEASUREMENTS: We used five categories of payer (e.g., Medicare), five categories of patient age (e.g., 18 to 64 years), and three categories of patient residence location (e.g., neither from the county of the hospital nor from a county contiguous to the county of the hospital). MAIN RESULTS: Sorting hospitals in descending sequence of numbers of surgical cases, depending on year, the top 10% of hospitals performed 58.4% to 59.2% of the cases. Increases in numbers of cases among patients with commercial insurance increased the heterogeneity among hospitals in numbers of surgical cases (P < 0.0001). However, the magnitude of the effect was very small, with an estimated relative marginal effect on the overall Gini index of only 0.9% ±â€¯0.2% (SE). Increases in numbers of cases of patients with Medicare insurance reduced the heterogeneity in numbers of cases among hospitals (P < 0.0001), but also with very small magnitude (-0.9% ±â€¯0.2%). In contrast, factors encouraging patient travel contributed to larger hospitals becoming larger, and smaller hospitals becoming smaller (3.9% ±â€¯0.7%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We found the absence of a substantive effect of insurance and national US payment systems on the relative distribution of surgical cases among hospitals. Anesthesia groups should focus on payer and payment reform in terms of their effects on payment rates (e.g., average payment per relative value guide unit), not on their potential effects on hospital caseloads.

At all hospitals in the State of Iowa over a decade, the number of cases performed during weekends or holidays increased approximately proportionally to the total caseload.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that over many years - a decade - hospitals' proportions of surgical cases that were performed on weekends and holidays remained stable. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Iowa Hospital Association data were from January 1, 2007, through June 30, 2017. The N = 42 hospitals included were those with at least 10 cases performed during holidays or weekends for each of the periods. MEASUREMENTS: The number of surgical cases performed at each hospital during each of the 21 half-year periods was considered the count of unique combinations of hospital, patient, and date with at least one major therapeutic procedure. MAIN RESULTS: Absolute predictive errors in cases per weekend or holiday day were calculated using a proportional model and using a quadratic model for each hospital and half-year period. Pooling among hospitals, the sample mean absolute predictive errors were greater for the proportional model than for the quadratic model (P < 0.0001). However, the mean difference was just 0.0027 cases per weekend or holiday day (SE 0.0001), significantly less than even 1 case per day (P < 0.0001). The sample means of the pairwise differences in predictive errors were smaller than 1 case per day for all 42 hospitals, significantly so for 41 of the 42 hospitals (P ≤ 0.005). These conditions applied to all other hospitals in the state, because each performed few cases on weekends and holidays. CONCLUSIONS: For the anesthesia group caring for patients at a hospital over several years, weekend and holiday anesthesia caseload should be expected to increase approximately proportionately to changes during regular workdays. Average weekend workload can be benchmarked using hospitals' percentages of operating room cases performed on weekends and holidays.

Heterogeneity among hospitals statewide in percentage shares of the annual growth of surgical caseloads of inpatient and outpatient major therapeutic procedures.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Suppose that it were a generalizable finding, in both densely populated and rural states, that there is marked heterogeneity among hospitals in the percentage change in surgical caseload and/or in the total change in caseload. Then, individual hospitals should not simply rely on federal and state forecasts to infer their expected growth. Likewise, individual hospitals and their anesthesiology groups would best not rely on national or US regional surgical trends as causal reasons for local trends in caseload. We examined the potential utility of using state data on surgical caseload to predict local growth by using 6 years of data for surgical cases performed at hospitals in the States of Florida and Iowa. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: 303 hospitals in Iowa and Florida. MEASUREMENTS: Cases with major therapeutic procedures in 2010 or 2011 were compared pairwise by hospital with such cases in 2015 and 2016. Changes in counts of cases were decreases or increases, while study of growth set decreases equal to zero. MAIN RESULTS: Hospitals in Iowa had slightly lesser percentage changes than did hospitals in Florida (Mann-Whitney P = 0.016). Hospitals in Iowa had greater variability among hospitals in the change in counts of cases with a major therapeutic procedure than did hospitals in Florida (P < 0.0001). The 10% of hospitals with the largest growths in counts of cases accounted for approximately half of the total growth in Iowa (70%) and Florida (54%). The large share of total growth attributable to the upper 10th percentile of hospitals was not caused solely by the hospitals having large percentage growths, based on there being weak correlation between growth and percentage growth, among the hospitals that grew (Iowa: Kendall's tau = 0.286 [SE 0.120]; Florida tau = 0.253 [SE 0.064]). CONCLUSIONS: Even if the data from states or federal agencies reported growth in surgical cases, there is too much concentration of growth at a few hospitals for statewide growth rates to be useful for forecasting by individual hospitals and anesthesiology groups.

Years Versus Days Between Successive Surgeries, After an Initial Outpatient Procedure, for the Median Patient Versus the Median Surgeon in the State of Iowa.

BACKGROUND: Previously, we studied the relative importance of different institutional interventions that the largest hospital in Iowa could take to grow the anesthesia department's outpatient surgical care. Most (>50%) patients having elective surgery had not previously had surgery at the hospital. Patient perioperative experience was unimportant for influencing total anesthesia workload and numbers of patients. More important was the availability of surgical clinic appointments within several days. These results would be generalizable if the median time from surgery to a patient's next surgical procedure was large (eg, >2 years), among all hospitals in Iowa with outpatient surgery, and without regard to the hospital where the next procedure was performed. METHODS: There were 37,172 surgical cases at hospital outpatient departments of any of the 117 hospitals in Iowa from July 1, 2013, to September 30, 2013. Data extracted about each case included its intraoperative work relative value units. The 37,172 cases were matched to all inpatient and outpatient records for the next 2 years statewide using patient linkage identifiers; from these were determined whether the patient had surgery again within 2 years. Furthermore, the cases' 1820 surgeons were matched to the surgeon's next outpatient or inpatient case, both including and excluding other cases performed on the date of the original case. RESULTS: By patient, the median time to their next surgical case, either outpatient or inpatient, exceeded 2 years, tested with weighting by intraoperative relative value units and repeated when unweighted (both P < .0001). Specifically, with weighting, 65.9% (99% confidence interval [CI], 65.2%-66.5%) of the patients had no other surgery within 2 years, at any hospital in the state. The median time exceeded 2 years for multiple categories of patients and similar measures of time to next surgery (all P < .01). In comparison, by surgeon, the median time to the next outpatient surgical case was 1 calendar day (99% CI, 0-1 day). The median was 3 days to the next date with at least 1 outpatient case (99% CI, 3-3 days). CONCLUSIONS: The median time to the next surgery was >2 years for patients versus 1 day for surgeons. Thus, although patients' experiences are an important attribute of quality of care, surgeons' experiences are orders of magnitude more important from the vantage point of marketing and growth of an anesthesia practice.

Lack of generalizability of observational studies' findings for turnover time reduction and growth in surgery based on the State of Iowa, where from one year to the next, most growth was attributable to surgeons performing only a few cases per week.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Three observational studies at large teaching hospitals found that reducing turnover times resulted in the surgeons performing more cases. We sought to determine if these findings are generalizable to other hospitals, because, if so, reducing turnover times may be an important mechanism for hospitals to use for growing caseloads. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: 116 hospitals in Iowa with inpatient or outpatient surgery from July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2015. SUBJECTS: Surgeons in Iowa, each with a unique identifier among hospitals. MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was the number of inpatient and outpatient cases that each surgeon performed each week during the first fiscal year beginning July 1, 2013. The dependent variables were surgeons' number of inpatient and outpatient surgical cases, and intraoperative work relative value units (RVU's) for outpatient cases, during the second fiscal year. MAIN RESULTS: The average hospital in Iowa had less than half of its growth from year 1 to year 2 in numbers of cases among surgeons who performed >2 cases per week in the baseline year (23.0%±2.5% [SE], P<0.0001 comparing mean to 50%). Less than half the growth in RVU's was among those surgeons (18.1%±2.2%, P<0.0001). The average hospital in Iowa had less than half of its growth in numbers of cases among surgeons who performed 2 or fewer cases per week at the hospital during the baseline year and >2 cases per week at other hospitals in the state during that year (24.4%±2.6%, P<0.0001). Less than half the growth in RVU's was among those surgeons (21.3%±2.5%, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Most (≥50%) annual growth in surgery, both based on the number of total inpatient and outpatient surgical cases, and on the total outpatient RVU's, was attributable to surgeons who performed 2 or fewer cases per week at each hospital statewide during the preceding year. Therefore, the strategic priority should be to assure that the many low-caseload surgeons have access to convenient OR time (e.g., by allocating sufficient OR time, and assigning surgeon blocks, in a mathematically sound, evidence-based way). Although reducing turnover times and anesthesia-controlled times to promote growth will be beneficial for a few surgeons, the effect on total caseload will be small.

At most hospitals in the state of Iowa, most surgeons' daily lists of elective cases include only 1 or 2 cases: Individual surgeons' percentage operating room utilization is a consistently unreliable metric.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Percentage utilization of operating room (OR) time is not an appropriate endpoint for planning additional OR time for surgeons with high caseloads, and cannot be measured accurately for surgeons with low caseloads. Nonetheless, many OR directors claim that their hospitals make decisions based on individual surgeons' OR utilizations. This incongruity could be explained by the OR managers considering the earlier mathematical studies, performed using data from a few large teaching hospitals, as irrelevant to their hospitals. The important mathematical parameter for the prior observations is the percentage of surgeon lists of elective cases that include 1 or 2 cases; "list" meaning a combination of surgeon, hospital, and date. We measure the incidence among many hospitals. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: 117 hospitals in Iowa from July 2013 through September 2015. SUBJECTS: Surgeons with same identifier among hospitals. MEASUREMENTS: Surgeon lists of cases including at least one outpatient surgical case, so that Relative Value Units (RVU's) could be measured. MAIN RESULTS: Averaging among hospitals in Iowa, more than half of the surgeons' lists included 1 or 2 cases (77%; P<0.00001 vs. 50%). Approximately half had 1 case (54%; P=0.0012 vs. 50%). These percentages exceeded 50% even though nearly all the surgeons operated at just 1 hospital on days with at least 1 case (97.74%; P<0.00001 vs. 50%). The cases were not of long durations; among the 82,928 lists with 1 case, the median was 6 intraoperative RVUs (e.g., adult inguinal herniorrhaphy). CONCLUSIONS: Accurate confidence intervals for raw or adjusted utilizations are so wide for individual surgeons that decisions based on utilization are equivalent to decisions based on random error. The implication of the current study is generalizability of that finding from the largest teaching hospital in the state to the other hospitals in the state.

Taking the Procedure to the Patient: Increasing Access to Urological Procedural Care through Outreach.

INTRODUCTION: We previously showed that urological outreach clinics significantly increase access to urological clinical care in rural populations. How such clinics affect access to urological procedural care is unknown. In this study we analyzed the use of outreach facilities for outpatient hospital based urological procedural care in a rural state. METHODS: Using information from the Office of Statewide Clinical Education Programs and the Iowa Hospital Association database, we analyzed provider level data in Iowa from 2010 to 2013. Based on CPT codes all outpatient urological procedural care was categorized by procedure type and intent. Cities containing an Iowa Hospital Association hospital were characterized as primary vs outreach. Geographic data were used for analysis of travel metrics and proximity to urological procedural care sites. Outreach urological procedures were then compared to urological procedural care at primary centers. RESULTS: During the study period 11,464 outreach urological procedures were performed, accounting for 15.0% of all outpatient urological procedures in the state. The yearly number of outreach procedures remained relatively stable during the study period. The majority (51.7%) of outreach urological procedures were therapeutic and endoscopic (62.9%) in nature. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was significantly more common for treating stone disease in the outreach setting compared to ureteroscopy (p <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A large percentage of the total urological procedural care in our state was done at outreach clinics and, while the majority was of low acuity, it was therapeutic. Changes in health care are projected to affect rural hospitals, which rely heavily on procedural care, and this study is the first to our knowledge to demonstrate the role that urological procedural care can have in such locations.