Dataset Information

Ambulatory-Based Bladder Outlet Procedures Offer Significant Cost Savings and Comparable 30-Day Outcomes Relative to Inpatient Procedures.

ABSTRACT: Introduction and Objectives: Budgetary constraints and novel minimally invasive surgical approaches have resulted in surgical care being increasingly provided at ambulatory centers rather than traditional inpatient settings. Despite increasing use of ambulatory-based procedure for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) procedures, little is known about the effect of care setting on perioperative outcomes and costs. We sought to compare 30-day readmissions rates and costs of BOO procedure performed in the ambulatory vs inpatient setting. Methods: Using Florida and New York all-payer data from the 2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Databases, we identified patients who underwent transurethral resection, thermotherapy, or laser/photovaporization for BOO. Patient demographics, regional data, 30-day readmissions rates, and costs (from converted charges) associated with the index procedure and revisits were analyzed. Predictors of 30-day revisits were also identified by fitting a multivariate logistic regression model with facility-level clustering. Results: Of the 15,094 patients identified, 1444 (9.6%) had a 30-day revisit at a median cost of $4263.43. The 30-day readmission rate for inpatient cases was significantly higher than that of surgeries performed in the ambulatory setting (12.0% vs 8.1%, p < 0.001). Payer status (private vs Medicare: odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62-0.95; p = 0.02) and index care setting (ambulatory vs inpatient: OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.40-0.57; p < 0.001) predicted 30-day revisits. Conclusions: We identified that index care setting and payer status are independent predictors of 30-day revisit after BOO procedure, with the inpatient setting and Medicare insurance associated with higher odds of revisit. Ambulatory procedures are significantly less costly than procedures performed in the inpatient setting, even after accounting for ambulatory procedures leading to an admission. There is an obvious cost benefit of offering BOO procedure in the ambulatory setting to the appropriate patient. In the context of value-based health care initiatives, our findings have important implications for policymakers seeking to reduce variation in nonclinical sources of perioperative costs and outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Nguyen DD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7757614 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesReadmission to acute care from the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) setting is potentially preventable and an important target of quality improvement and cost savings. The objective of this study was to develop a risk calculator to predict 30-day all-cause readmissions from the IRF setting.DesignRetrospective database analysis using the Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation (UDSMR) from 2015 through 2019.Setting and participantsIn total, 956 US inpatient rehabilitation facilities and 1,849,768 IRF discharges comprising patients from 14 impairment groups.MethodsLogistic regression models were developed to calculate risk-standardized 30-day all-cause hospital readmission rates for patients admitted to an IRF. Models for each impairment group were assessed using 12 common clinical and demographic variables and all but 4 models included various special variables. Models were assessed for discrimination (c-statistics), calibration (calibration plots), and internal validation (bootstrapping). A readmission risk scoring system was created for each impairment group population and was graphically validated.ResultsThe mean age of the cohort was 68.7 (15.2) years, 50.7% were women, and 78.3% were Caucasian. Medicare was the primary payer for 73.1% of the study population. The final models for each impairment group included between 4 and 13 total predictor variables. Model c-statistics ranged from 0.65 to 0.70. There was good calibration represented for most models up to a readmission risk of 30%. Internal validation of the models using bootstrap samples revealed little bias. Point systems for determining risk of 30-day readmission were developed for each impairment group.Conclusions and implicationsMultivariable risk factor algorithms based upon administrative data were developed to assess 30-day readmission risk for patients admitted from IRF. This report represents the development of a readmission risk calculator for the IRF setting, which could be instrumental in identifying high risk populations for readmission and targeting resources towards a diverse group of IRF impairment groups.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the association of Private, Medicare, and Medicaid/Uninsured insurance type with 30-day Emergency Department visits/Observation Stays (EDOS), readmissions, and costs in a safety-net hospital (SNH) serving diverse socioeconomic status patients.Summary background dataMedicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) disproportionately penalizes SNHs.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used inpatient National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) data merged with cost data. Frailty, expanded Operative Stress Score, case status, and insurance type were used to predict odds of EDOS and readmissions, as well as index hospitalization costs.ResultsThe cohort had 1,477 Private; 1,164 Medicare; and 3,488 Medicaid/Uninsured cases with a patient mean age 52.1 years [SD=14.7] and 46.8% of the cases were performed on male patients. Medicaid/Uninsured (aOR=2.69, CI=2.38-3.05, P<.001) and Medicare (aOR=1.32, CI=1.11-1.56, P=.001) had increased odds of urgent/emergent surgeries and complications versus Private patients. Despite having similar frailty distributions, Medicaid/Uninsured compared to Private patients had higher odds of EDOS (aOR=1.71, CI=1.39-2.11, P<.001), and readmissions (aOR=1.35, CI=1.11-1.65, P=.004), after adjusting for frailty, OSS, and case status, while Medicare patients had similar odds of EDOS and readmissions versus Private. Hospitalization variable cost %change was increased for Medicare (12.5%) and Medicaid/Uninsured (5.9%), but Medicaid/Uninsured was similar to Private after adjusting for urgent/emergent cases.ConclusionsIncreased rates and odds of urgent/emergent cases in Medicaid/Uninsured patients drive increased odds of complications and index hospitalization costs versus Private. SNHs care for higher cost populations while receiving lower reimbursements and are further penalized by the unintended consequences of HRRP. Increasing access to care, especially for Medicaid/Uninsured patients, could reduce urgent/emergent surgeries resulting in fewer complications, EDOS/readmissions, and costs.

Dataset Information

Ambulatory-Based Bladder Outlet Procedures Offer Significant Cost Savings and Comparable 30-Day Outcomes Relative to Inpatient Procedures.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets