Literature DB >> 30861538

Are Joint Surgeons Being Adequately Compensated for Single-Component versus Double-Component Revision TKA? An Analysis of Relative Value Units.

Azeem Tariq Malik1, Thomas J Scharschmidt1, Mengnai Li1, Nikhil Jain1, Safdar N Khan1.   

Abstract

Relative value units (RVUs) are used for ensuring that physicians are appropriately reimbursed based on case complexity. While past research has elucidated that surgeons are reimbursed at a higher rate for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus revision TKA, no study has explored differences in reimbursements between single-component and double-component revisions, considering a double-component revision is likely to require more effort/skill as compared with single-component revision. The 2015 to 2016 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files were queried using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for single-component revision TKA (CPT-27486) and double-component revision TKA (CPT-27487). A total of 1,962 single-component and 4,184 double component revisions were performed during this period. Total RVUs, RVU/min, and dollar amount/min were calculated for each case. The mean RVU was 21.12 and 27.11 for single-component and double-component revision TKAs, respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted in mean operative time (single component = 100.44 vs. double component = 144.29; p < 0.001) between the two groups. Single-component revision had a significantly higher mean RVU/min (0.267) versus double-component revision (0.223). The reimbursement amounts calculated for single-component versus double-component revisions were per minute ($9.58/min vs. $8.00/min), per case ($962.22 vs. $1,154.32), and per day ($5,773.32 vs. $4,617.28) with a projected annualized cost difference of $184,966. Orthopaedic surgeons are reimbursed at a higher rate for single-component revision TKAs as compared with double-component revision TKAs, despite the higher complexity and longer operative times required in the latter. The study highlights the need for a change in the RVUs for either double-component or single-component revision to ensure reimbursement per unit time is adequate for performing a complex case such as double-component revision TKA. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30861538     DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1681094

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Knee Surg        ISSN: 1538-8506            Impact factor:   2.757


  3 in total

1.  Are Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons Being Adequately Compensated for Treating Nonunions of the Femoral Shaft?: An Analysis of Relative Value Units.

Authors:  Azeem Tariq Malik; Carmen E Quatman; Laura S Phieffer; Safdar N Khan; Thuan V Ly
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2020-10-01

2.  Current Relative Value Unit Scale Does Not Appropriately Compensate for Longer Orthopedic Sports Surgeries.

Authors:  Trevor Simcox; Jason Kreinces; Daniel Tarazona; Ioannis Zouzias; Mark Grossman
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-10-30

3.  Temporal Trends of Revision Etiologies in Total Knee Arthroplasty at a Single High-Volume Institution: An Epidemiological Analysis.

Authors:  Benjamin Kerzner; Kyle N Kunze; Michael B O'Sullivan; Karan Pandher; Brett R Levine
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-05-17
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.