Literature DB >> 23625577

Health policy implications of outcomes measurement in orthopaedics.

John Philip Andrawis1, Kate Eresian Chenok, Kevin J Bozic.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An emphasis on "value" over volume in health care is driving new healthcare measurement, delivery, and payment models. Orthopaedic surgery is a major contributor to healthcare spending and, as such, is the focus of many of these new models. WHERE ARE WE NOW?: An evaluation of "value" in orthopaedics requires information that has not traditionally been collected as part of routine clinical practice. If value is defined as patient outcomes in relation to healthcare costs, we need to collect information about both. In orthopaedics, patient-reported functional status is not routinely measured, and a poor understanding of the costs associated with the provision of musculoskeletal care limits our ability to quantify and report on financial measures. WHERE DO WE NEED TO GO?: To improve the value of musculoskeletal care, we need to focus on both improving outcomes and controlling costs. To improve outcomes, orthopaedists must agree on a set of outcome measures for appropriate care and advocate for their collection through the use of registries. Orthopaedic registries in several countries provide best practices for this information collection and sharing. In the United States, we should make comparable investments in registries to measure patient-reported outcomes. To address escalating costs, we need to improve the accuracy of cost data by applying modern cost accounting processes. HOW DO WE GET THERE?: Orthopaedists should take a leadership position in the promotion and implementation of value-based health care by advocating for the use of registries to measure risk-adjusted patient specific outcomes, negotiating with payors for value-based payment incentives and applying modern cost accounting processes to control costs rather than waiting for public and private payors to define components of the value equation that will affect how orthopaedic surgeons are evaluated and compensated in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23625577      PMCID: PMC3792288          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3014-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  36 in total

Review 1.  Measuring functional outcomes in persons with back pain: a review of back-specific questionnaires.

Authors:  J A Kopec
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Development of the New Zealand Joint Register.

Authors:  A G Rothwell
Journal:  Bull Hosp Jt Dis       Date:  1999

3.  The advantages and disadvantages of process-based measures of health care quality.

Authors:  H R Rubin; P Pronovost; G B Diette
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.038

4.  Outcomes evaluation in orthopaedics.

Authors:  J Dawson; A Carr
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-04

5.  The Swedish Total Hip Replacement Register.

Authors:  Henrik Malchau; Peter Herberts; Thomas Eisler; Göran Garellick; Peter Söderman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Activity-based costing: a practical model for cost calculation in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Yolande Lievens; Walter van den Bogaert; Katrien Kesteloot
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Comparison of several model-based methods for analysing incomplete quality of life data in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  D L Fairclough; H F Peterson; D Cella; P Bonomi
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998 Mar 15-Apr 15       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Long-term registration has improved the quality of hip replacement: a review of the Swedish THR Register comparing 160,000 cases.

Authors:  P Herberts; H Malchau
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  2000-04

9.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan; C H Goldsmith; J Campbell; L W Stitt
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 4.666

10.  Availability of consumer prices from US hospitals for a common surgical procedure.

Authors:  Jaime A Rosenthal; Xin Lu; Peter Cram
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-03-25       Impact factor: 21.873

View more
  11 in total

1.  The PROMIS Global Health Questionnaire Correlates With the QuickDASH in Patients With Upper Extremity Illness.

Authors:  Nicky Stoop; Mariano E Menendez; Jos J Mellema; David Ring
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2017-02-13

2.  Development and Validation of a Disease-Specific Questionnaire for Basal Joint Arthritis.

Authors:  Peter C Noback; Joseph M Lombardi; Mani Seetharaman; Donald H Lee; Robert J Strauch; Melvin P Rosenwasser
Journal:  J Wrist Surg       Date:  2016-10-14

3.  CORR Insights®: Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

Authors:  Wendy M Novicoff
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Higher Preoperative Patient Activation Associated With Better Patient-reported Outcomes After Total Joint Arthroplasty.

Authors:  John Andrawis; Sina Akhavan; Vanessa Chan; Mandeep Lehil; Dana Pong; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Psychometrics of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function instrument administered by computerized adaptive testing and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand in the orthopedic elbow patient population.

Authors:  Man Hung; Maren W Voss; Jerry Bounsanga; Yushan Gu; Erin K Granger; Robert Z Tashjian
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 6.  Stakeholders in outcome measures: review from a clinical perspective.

Authors:  Mark R Brinker; Daniel P O'Connor
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 7.  A systematic review of outcomes reporting for brachial plexus reconstruction.

Authors:  Christopher J Dy; Rohit Garg; Steve K Lee; Phillip Tow; Carol A Mancuso; Scott W Wolfe
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2014-12-13       Impact factor: 2.230

Review 8.  Clinical Outcome Reporting in Youth ACL Literature Is Widely Variable.

Authors:  Christopher M Brusalis; Nikita Lakomkin; Joash R Suryavanshi; Aristides I Cruz; Daniel W Green; Kristofer J Jones; Peter D Fabricant
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-08-11

Review 9.  How Comprehensive and Efficient Are Patient-Reported Outcomes for Rotator Cuff Tears?

Authors:  Eric C Makhni; Jason T Hamamoto; John D Higgins; Taylor Patterson; Justin W Griffin; Anthony A Romeo; Nikhil N Verma
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-03-09

10.  Return-to-Work Following Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Proximal Humerus Fractures.

Authors:  Michael Dietrich; Mathias Wasmer; Andreas Platz; Christian Spross
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2014-09-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.