Tsun Yee Law1, Samuel Rosas1, Zachary S Hubbard1, Lee Onn Chieng1, Harvey W Chim2. 1. Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida. 2. Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida; Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida. Electronic address: harveychim@yahoo.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is performed with an open or endoscopic approach. Current literature suggests that the endoscopic approach is associated with higher costs and a steeper learning curve. This study evaluated the billing and utilization trends of both approaches. METHODS: A retrospective review of a Medicare database within the PearlDiver Supercomputer (Warsaw, IN) was performed for patients undergoing open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) or endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) from 2005-2012. Annual utilization, charges, reimbursement, demographic data, and compound annual growth rate (CAGR) were evaluated. RESULTS: Our query returned 1,500,603 carpal tunnel syndrome patients, of which 507,924 (33.8%) and 68,768 (4.6%) were surgically managed with OCTR and ECTR respectively (remainder treated conservatively). Compound annual growth rate was significantly higher in ECTR (5%) than OCTR (0.9%; P < 0.001). Average charges were higher in OCTR ($3820) than ECTR ($2952), whereas reimbursements were higher in ECTR (mean $1643) than OCTR (mean $1312). Both were performed most commonly in the age range of 65-69 y, females, and southern geographic region. CONCLUSIONS: ECTR is growing faster than OCTR in the Medicare population. Contrary to previous literature, our study shows that ECTR had lower charges and reimbursed at a higher rate than OCTR.
BACKGROUND: Surgical management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is performed with an open or endoscopic approach. Current literature suggests that the endoscopic approach is associated with higher costs and a steeper learning curve. This study evaluated the billing and utilization trends of both approaches. METHODS: A retrospective review of a Medicare database within the PearlDiver Supercomputer (Warsaw, IN) was performed for patients undergoing open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) or endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) from 2005-2012. Annual utilization, charges, reimbursement, demographic data, and compound annual growth rate (CAGR) were evaluated. RESULTS: Our query returned 1,500,603 carpal tunnel syndromepatients, of which 507,924 (33.8%) and 68,768 (4.6%) were surgically managed with OCTR and ECTR respectively (remainder treated conservatively). Compound annual growth rate was significantly higher in ECTR (5%) than OCTR (0.9%; P < 0.001). Average charges were higher in OCTR ($3820) than ECTR ($2952), whereas reimbursements were higher in ECTR (mean $1643) than OCTR (mean $1312). Both were performed most commonly in the age range of 65-69 y, females, and southern geographic region. CONCLUSIONS: ECTR is growing faster than OCTR in the Medicare population. Contrary to previous literature, our study shows that ECTR had lower charges and reimbursed at a higher rate than OCTR.
Authors: William Baker; Michael Rivlin; Samir Sodha; Michael Nakashian; Brian Katt; Daniel Fletcher; Kevin Lutsky; Pedro Beredjiklian Journal: Hand (N Y) Date: 2020-10-27