New CMS Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway After Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Preparing for Mandatory Reporting.

This article discusses the implementation of a new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway (MVPs) applicable to elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty as created by Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) - the Improving Care for Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP (MVP ID: G0058). We describe specific quality measures, surgeon-hospital collaborations, future developments with Quality Payment Program, and how lessons from early implementation will empower clinicians to participate in the refining of this MVP. The CMS has designed MVPs as a subset of measures relevant to a specialty or medical condition, in an effort to reduce the burden of reporting and improve assessment of care quality. Physicians and payors must be mindful of detrimental effects these measures in their current form may have on surgeons, institutions, and patients, including disincentivizing care for sicker or more vulnerable populations, and increased administrative costs. Early voluntary participation is crucial to gain valuable experience for the orthopedic community and in an effort to work alongside CMS to maximize care while minimizing cost for patients and burden for providers.

Oncology Patients Are High Cost Outliers in Total Joint Replacement Bundled Payment Systems.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services began its first mandatory bundled payment program, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, which covers a 90-day episode of care. This study determined whether oncology patients enrolled in the CJR bundle incur higher hospital costs than patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients enrolled in the CJR bundled payments system from April 1, 2016 to June 31, 2018 at a single academic medical center was conducted. To determine whether tumor patients had higher total episode costs, this group was compared to patients diagnosed with OA using a 2-tailed t-test. To adjust for moderators of total hospital costs, we used generalized linear regression with a log-link, including multiple variables abstracted from chart review. RESULTS: Three hundred fourteen patients met inclusion criteria (12 primary or metastatic tumors, 302 OA). Fifty-eight percent of tumor patients were over the target price vs 16% of OA patients. The mean tumor patient had $40,862 for total internal hospital costs compared to $16,356 in the OA group (P < .001). Length of stay was greater in the tumor group (6.75 vs 2.0 days, P < .001). A greater percentage of tumor patients were discharged to a skilled nursing facility (67% vs 27%, P = .006) with significantly higher skilled nursing facility episode costs ($18,852 vs $7731, P = .04). With adjustment for fracture status, tumor patients were 5.36 times more likely to exceed the CJR target price than OA patients (risk ratio 5.36, confidence interval 3.44-8.35, P < .001) and 50 times more likely to be outliers over the regional threshold than OA patients (risk ratio 50.33, confidence interval 16.33-155.19, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Oncology patients enrolled in the CJR bundled payment model incur significantly higher costs and have higher cost variability than patients with OA. We recommend that oncology patients be excluded from the CJR bundle.

The economic impact of reprocessing external fixation components.

BACKGROUND: The trend toward temporizing external fixation of complex fractures has resulted in increased expenditures for these devices. Increasing pressure to reduce health-care expenditures has led to exploration of reuse of equipment intended for single use. Devices must be tested and recertified prior to redeployment in hospital stock. We report the rate of manufacturer recertification and institutional cost savings associated with a reuse program approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. METHODS: All Hoffmann-II external fixation components that had been removed at our institution during the study period were submitted to the manufacturer for visual inspection and mechanical testing. Pass rates for original components and previously recycled components were determined. With use of a conservative pass rate and the assumption of a maximum of three recertifications of each component, the total potential hospital savings on external fixation were calculated. RESULTS: The first pass rate was 76%. The second pass rate (i.e., the rate for components that had already been recertified once and had been sent for a second recertification) was 83%, but that rate was derived from a limited sample. On the basis of a conservative pass-rate estimate of 75%, the predicted average number of uses of a recyclable component was 2.7. The recertified components were sold back to our hospital at 50% of the original price. Because carbon-fiber bars and half-pins are not recycled, 85% of the charges expended on a new external fixation component are spent on portions of the system that are recyclable. The potential total savings on reusable components was found to be 32%, with a total savings of 27% for the whole external fixation system. No recertified components failed in clinical use over the course of the study. CONCLUSIONS: With the expansion of cost-control efforts, the recycling of medical devices appears inevitable. Previous data have demonstrated the safety of reuse of external fixation devices, and this study confirms that finding. Our paper demonstrates the real cost savings associated with a manufacturer-based testing and recertification program. Issues of voluntary participation in reuse programs, component ownership, and the impact of savings on patient charges are yet to be worked out by individual institutions.

Diagnosis and management of synovial sarcoma.

Synovial sarcoma is a unique tumor with substantial promise for biologically targeted therapy. Although it demonstrates moderate chemosensitivity, with approximately 50% response rates to ifosfamide- and doxorubicin-containing regimens, it has a diagnostic translocation and a potentially informative chimeric protein product. Although surgical management remains the cornerstone to effect local control, therapeutic advancements are unlikely to occur by continuing to include advanced cases of synovial sarcomas in trials with other soft tissue sarcomas. Rather, attention should be turned toward prospective molecular targets and development of novel agents to exploit them. Research should be directed at understanding the fusion protein of the X,18 translocation and further validating the role of overexpressed proteins in synovial sarcoma. Meanwhile, carefully designed clinical trials of these agents, with translational correlates, will provide in vivo data to complement the preclinical experience.