BACKGROUND: Relative value units (RVUs) are used to evaluate the effort required for providing a service to patients in order to determine compensation. Thus, more complicated cases, like revision arthroplasty cases, should yield a greater compensation. However, there are limited data comparing RVUs to the time required to complete the service. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the (1) mean RVUs, (2) mean operative times, and (3) mean RVU/minute between primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and (4) perform an individualized idealized surgeon annual cost difference analysis. METHODS: A total of 103,702 patients who underwent primary (current procedural terminology code 27130) and 7273 patients who underwent revision THA (current procedural terminology code 27134) were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Mean RVUs, operative times (minutes), and RVU/minute were calculated and compared using Student t-test. Dollar amount per minute, per case, per day, and year was calculated to find an individualized idealized surgeon annual cost difference. RESULTS: The mean RVU was 21.24 ± 0.53 (range, 20.72-21.79) for primary and 30.27 ± 0.03 (range, 30.13-30.28) for revision THA (P < .001). The mean operative time for primary THA was 94 ± 38 minutes (range, 30-480 minutes) and 152 ± 75 minutes (range, 30-475 minutes) for revision THA (P < .001). The mean RVU/minute was 0.260 ± 0.10 (range, 0.04-0.73) for primary and 0.249 ± 0.12 (range, 0.06-1.0) for revision cases (P < .001). The dollar amounts calculated for primary vs revision THA were as follows: per minute ($9.33 vs $8.93), per case ($877.12 vs $1358.32), per day ($6139.84 vs $5433.26), and a projected $113,052.28 annual cost difference for an individual surgeon. CONCLUSION: Maximizing the RVU/minute provides the greatest "hourly rate." The RVU/minute for primary (0.260) being significantly greater than revision THA (0.249) and an annualized $113,052.28 cost difference reveal that although revision THAs are more complex cases requiring longer operative time, greater technical skill, and aftercare, compensation per time is not greater.
BACKGROUND: Relative value units (RVUs) are used to evaluate the effort required for providing a service to patients in order to determine compensation. Thus, more complicated cases, like revision arthroplasty cases, should yield a greater compensation. However, there are limited data comparing RVUs to the time required to complete the service. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the (1) mean RVUs, (2) mean operative times, and (3) mean RVU/minute between primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and (4) perform an individualized idealized surgeon annual cost difference analysis. METHODS: A total of 103,702 patients who underwent primary (current procedural terminology code 27130) and 7273 patients who underwent revision THA (current procedural terminology code 27134) were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Mean RVUs, operative times (minutes), and RVU/minute were calculated and compared using Student t-test. Dollar amount per minute, per case, per day, and year was calculated to find an individualized idealized surgeon annual cost difference. RESULTS: The mean RVU was 21.24 ± 0.53 (range, 20.72-21.79) for primary and 30.27 ± 0.03 (range, 30.13-30.28) for revision THA (P < .001). The mean operative time for primary THA was 94 ± 38 minutes (range, 30-480 minutes) and 152 ± 75 minutes (range, 30-475 minutes) for revision THA (P < .001). The mean RVU/minute was 0.260 ± 0.10 (range, 0.04-0.73) for primary and 0.249 ± 0.12 (range, 0.06-1.0) for revision cases (P < .001). The dollar amounts calculated for primary vs revision THA were as follows: per minute ($9.33 vs $8.93), per case ($877.12 vs $1358.32), per day ($6139.84 vs $5433.26), and a projected $113,052.28 annual cost difference for an individual surgeon. CONCLUSION: Maximizing the RVU/minute provides the greatest "hourly rate." The RVU/minute for primary (0.260) being significantly greater than revision THA (0.249) and an annualized $113,052.28 cost difference reveal that although revision THAs are more complex cases requiring longer operative time, greater technical skill, and aftercare, compensation per time is not greater.
Authors: Jared M Newman; Nipun Sodhi; Alyeesha B Wilhelm; Anton Khlopas; Alison K Klika; Qais Naziri; Thomas J Kryzak; Carlos A Higuera; Michael A Mont Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Marine Coste; Vineet Aggarwal; Neil V Shah; David Kim; Omar K Hariri; Louis M Day; Scott C Pascal; Jaydev B Mistry; William P Urban; William R Aibinder; Arvind G Von Keudell; Nishant Suneja Journal: Arch Bone Jt Surg Date: 2021-07
Authors: Hiba K Anis; Nipun Sodhi; Marine Coste; Joseph O Ehiorobo; Jared M Newman; Luke J Garbarino; Peter Gold; Benjamin Freund; Nicolas Piuzzi; Michael A Mont Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2019-02
Authors: James E Feng; Afshin A Anoushiravani; Lauren H Schoof; Jonathan A Gabor; Jorge Padilla; James Slover; Ran Schwarzkopf Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 4.755