nationwide trends in hospital charges
play

Nationwide Trends in Hospital Charges Hetal Fichadia MD, Juliana E - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Immediate Breast Reconstruction - Nationwide Trends in Hospital Charges Hetal Fichadia MD, Juliana E Hansen MD, FACS Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Oregon Health and Sciences University Introduction We sought to analyze the trends in


  1. Immediate Breast Reconstruction - Nationwide Trends in Hospital Charges Hetal Fichadia MD, Juliana E Hansen MD, FACS Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Oregon Health and Sciences University

  2. Introduction • We sought to analyze the trends in total hospital charges and length of stay among patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction – both implant based and autologous.

  3. Methods • Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried from 2000 to 2009 using ICD-9 codes to identify patients undergoing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction 1 .

  4. Methods • This data was analyzed to follow the rates of immediate reconstruction, total hospital charges (in dollars) and length of stay over this time frame. • Statistical significance was assessed by linear regression and ANOVA using SPSS.

  5. Results • After applying discharge weights, a total of 782,418 patients underwent mastectomy during the study period, out of which 253,238 (32.3%) underwent immediate reconstruction. • Rate of immediate reconstruction increased from 26.3% in 2000 to 43.9% in 2009 (p<0.001)

  6. Mastectomy - charges 30000 25000 Total charges (in dollars) 20000 15000 2000 2009 10000 5000 0 Unilateral Bilateral Mastectomy charges – Comparison 2000 vs 2009

  7. Expected vs actual charges for mastectomy 20000 18000 Total hospital charges (in dollars) 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Actual charges- mastectomy Expected charges - mastectomy

  8. Autologous reconstruction charges 60000 50000 Total charges (in dollars) 40000 30000 2000 2009 20000 10000 0 Unilateral Bilateral Autologous Reconstruction - Comparision 2000 vs 2009

  9. Expected vs actual increase in charges autologous - bilateral Total hospital charges (in dollars) 55000� 45000� 35000� 25000� 15000� 2000� 2001� 2002� 2003� 2004� 2005� 2006� 2007� 2008� 2009� Actual� charges� bilateral� (Median)� Expected� charges� bilateral� �

  10. Expected vs actual increase in charges autologous - unilateral Total hospital charges (in dollars) 45000� 35000� 25000� 15000� 2000� 2001� 2002� 2003� 2004� 2005� 2006� 2007� 2008� 2009� Actual� charges� for� unilateral� (median)� Expected� charges� for� unilateral� �

  11. Implant-based reconstruction charges 50000 45000 40000 Total charges (in dollars) 35000 30000 25000 2000 20000 2009 15000 10000 5000 0 Unilateral Bilateral Implant-based reconstruction - Comparision 2000 vs 2009

  12. Expected vs actual charges Implant based - unilateral 40000� Total hospital charges (in dollars) 35000� 30000� 25000� 20000� 15000� 10000� 2000� 2001� 2002� 2003� 2004� 2005� 2006� 2007� 2008� 2009� Actual� charges� for� unilateral� (median)� Expected� charges� for� unilateral� �

  13. Expected vs actual charges Implant based - bilateral 50000� Total hospital charges (in dollars) 45000� 40000� 35000� 30000� 25000� 20000� 15000� 10000� 2000� 2001� 2002� 2003� 2004� 2005� 2006� 2007� 2008� 2009� Actual� charges� bilateral� (Median)� Expected� charges� bilateral� �

  14. • Increase in charges for breast reconstruction procedures are significantly higher than the 3.5% per year rise in Medicare spending from 1992 to 2006 2 . • Adjusting for inflation using the PHCE (Personal Health Care Expenditure) Price Index from the CMS office of actuary allows for healthcare expenditure rise of 141% in this study period 3 .

  15. Length of Stay • The mean length of stay for patients undergoing implant-based reconstruction changed from 2.2 to 2.04 days. • Mean length of stay for patients undergoing autologous reconstruction changed from 3.86 to 3.06 days.

  16. Conclusions • The total charges for all immediate breast reconstruction cases have shown a disproportionate increase over the past decade. • Further studies are needed to identify the factors

  17. Explanations • Use of ADMs • Costlier implants • Increase in microvascular reconstruction • Increase in complexity of cases • Increased mark-up of medical devices

  18. References 1. HCUP Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). 2007-2009. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcup- us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp 2. http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets /costs/expriach/index.html 3. http://meps.ahrq.gov/about_meps/Price_Index.sh tml

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend