Oncology patients incur significantly higher costs under the current bundled payment model for total joint replacement
Presenter Biography
Lauren Raymond is a second year medical student at Oregon Health & Science University. Prior to medical school, Lauren worked in orthopaedics for several years and currently has an interest in cost effectiveness research.
Institution
OHSU
Degree
MD
Presentation Type
Poster
Room Location
Smith Memorial Student Union, Room 296/8
Start Date
April 2019
End Date
April 2019
Rights
© Copyright the author(s)
IN COPYRIGHT:
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
DISCLAIMER:
The purpose of this statement is to help the public understand how this Item may be used. When there is a (non-standard) License or contract that governs re-use of the associated Item, this statement only summarizes the effects of some of its terms. It is not a License, and should not be used to license your Work. To license your own Work, use a License offered at https://creativecommons.org/
Persistent Identifier
https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/30964
Abstract
Introduction: In 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, a bundled payment system which requires hospitals to account for the cost and quality of a 90-day episode of care.
The objective of this study was to compare costs in patients enrolled in the CJR model undergoing joint replacement for local hip or knee tumors versus primary osteoarthritis.
Methods: We performed a retrospective review of bundle-eligible patients undergoing joint replacement for local tumor or osteoarthritis at OHSU from 2016-2018. Abstracted chart data included age, BMI, smoking status, and medical comorbidities. Hospital cost data was provided by OHSU financial services. Rates of reimbursement were provided by CMS. We compared costs between groups using two-tailed t-tests. We created a linear regression model with a log-link to adjust for covariates.
Results: 370 patients met inclusion criteria; 15 had a joint replacement for primary or metastatic tumor, and 355 for osteoarthritis. Mean hospital costs were significantly higher in tumor patients ($37,152 vs $16,824, p<0.001). The inclusion of other covariates including gender, age, obesity, diabetes, smoking, and bleeding disorders did not alter the statistical significance of the association between oncologic diagnosis and higher costs.
Conclusion: Oncology patients enrolled in the CJR bundle incur significantly higher costs than patients with primary osteoarthritis. As costs associated with these patients exceed the CJR reimbursement, we recommend that oncology patients be excluded from the CJR bundle.
Oncology patients incur significantly higher costs under the current bundled payment model for total joint replacement
Smith Memorial Student Union, Room 296/8
Introduction: In 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, a bundled payment system which requires hospitals to account for the cost and quality of a 90-day episode of care.
The objective of this study was to compare costs in patients enrolled in the CJR model undergoing joint replacement for local hip or knee tumors versus primary osteoarthritis.
Methods: We performed a retrospective review of bundle-eligible patients undergoing joint replacement for local tumor or osteoarthritis at OHSU from 2016-2018. Abstracted chart data included age, BMI, smoking status, and medical comorbidities. Hospital cost data was provided by OHSU financial services. Rates of reimbursement were provided by CMS. We compared costs between groups using two-tailed t-tests. We created a linear regression model with a log-link to adjust for covariates.
Results: 370 patients met inclusion criteria; 15 had a joint replacement for primary or metastatic tumor, and 355 for osteoarthritis. Mean hospital costs were significantly higher in tumor patients ($37,152 vs $16,824, p<0.001). The inclusion of other covariates including gender, age, obesity, diabetes, smoking, and bleeding disorders did not alter the statistical significance of the association between oncologic diagnosis and higher costs.
Conclusion: Oncology patients enrolled in the CJR bundle incur significantly higher costs than patients with primary osteoarthritis. As costs associated with these patients exceed the CJR reimbursement, we recommend that oncology patients be excluded from the CJR bundle.