This paper considers the new financial infrastructure of the National Health Service and provides a resource for orthopaedic surgeons. We describe the importance of accurate documentation and data collection for National Health Service hospital Trust finances and league tables, and support our discussion with examples drawn from our local audit work.

Aim: To investigate the magnitude of revenue lost by the Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics at Ports-mouth Hospitals NHS Trust in 2007 as a result of providing outpatient viscosupplementation joint injections.

Methods: Data was collated on all outpatient intra-articular hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation performed by our department in 2007. Information on existing HRG tariffs for orthopaedic outpatient attendances as well as clinical coding of joint injections by our department was also gathered.

Results: The 2007/2008 tariffs for orthopaedic outpatient first and follow-up appointments were £147 and £73 respectively for adults, and £157 and £85 respectively for children (under 17 years of age). No additional mandatory tariff currently exists for joint injections performed in the outpatient setting. During our study period, the cost of a dose of viscosuplementation (Hyaluronic acid 60mg/ 3 ml) varied between £213 and £248. A total of 812 doses of viscosupplementation were administered to outpatients by our department resulting in pharmaceutical costs of £175,126. Only 751 cases of outpatient appointment with joint injection (all types) were recorded and coded by the department.

Conclusions:

As long as no mandatory DoH tariff exists for out-patient joint injections, outpatient viscosupplementation remains an expensive service for trusts to provide and may warrant rationalisation.

Introduction

The Department of Health determined that, from April 2011, Trusts would not be paid for emergency readmissions within 30 days of discharge. The purpose of our project was to identify factors associated with such readmissions and implement plans for improvement.

Revision arthroplasty of the hip is expensive owing to the increased cost of pre-operative investigations, surgical implants and instrumentation, protracted hospital stay and drugs. We compared the costs of performing this surgery for aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture. Clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 305 consecutive revision total hip replacements in 286 patients performed at a tertiary referral centre between 1999 and 2008. The mean total costs for revision surgery in aseptic cases (n = 194) were £11 897 (sd 4629), for septic revision (n = 76) £21 937 (sd 10 965), for peri-prosthetic fracture (n = 24) £18 185 (sd 9124), and for dislocation (n = 11) £10 893 (sd 5476). Surgery for deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture was associated with longer operating times, increased blood loss and an increase in complications compared to revisions for aseptic loosening. Total inpatient stay was also significantly longer on average (p < 0.001). Financial costs vary significantly by indication, which is not reflected in current National Health Service tariffs.

Introduction. We conducted an audit on hip fractures to analyse the accuracy of coding and payment by results in our institution. Materials/Methods. The initial audits analysed hip fracture over a period of four months at two different trusts. Case notes were reviewed to extract data regarding diagnosis, comorbidities and operative procedures. The findings were compared with the data from clinical coding department and difference in the tariff was analysed. A re-audit was performed at Trust B after implementation of changes to assess improvement. Results. In the initial audit 111 patients were reviewed. Twenty-three percent patients had all data correctly coded. In the remaining 77%, some of the co-morbidities had been missed, e.g. UTI, anaemia and osteoporosis etc. 11.7% of operative procedures and 16.5% of fracture patterns were incorrectly coded resulting in loss of £53 000 over the 4 month period. Poor documentation and the use of ‘uncodable’ language by clinicians were responsible for missing co-morbidities, while inadequate medical knowledge of clinical coders resulted in the incorrect recording of operative procedures. We implemented changes in the form of clinical coders training, awareness of “codable words” by medical staff and writing the procedure codes by the surgeons themselves. A re-audit at Trust B showed an estimated savings of £18540.00 over 3 months period, demonstrating a significant improvement. Conclusion. Inaccuracies in clinical coding result in loss of tariff. Awareness of codable words, writing the operative codes by surgeons and training of clinical coders can improve clinical coding and payment by results in NHS hospitals

Introduction: Payment by results was introduced into the NHS in an effort to finance Trusts fairly and reward good performance. Tariffs for a single patient episode are derived from diagnosis and procedure codes, comorbidities, patient age, and length of stay. Poor data collection can result in a lower tariff with subsequent under billing of the Primary Care Trust (PCT). In addition, an individual surgeon’s performance in future comparison league tables will rely on the accuracy of this data. Methods of documentation and data collection vary in different units. We evaluated the methods and the resulting tariffs in 2 units in the Northern Deanery. Methods: Case notes were examined for 20 consecutive orthopaedic patients discharged from unit A, and 20 from unit B. The case mix in the two groups was similar. A correct tariff based on case notes was compared with the actual tariff used to bill the PCT for each patient. The coding department derived actual tariffs from data in electronic discharge summaries created by ward based junior medical staff in unit A. Accurately completed typed case notes were available to coders in unit B. Results: Only 3 of the 20 tariffs (15%) were correct for unit A patients. This represented a total financial loss to the trust of £14892 (25% of total revenue). In unit B, 19 of 20 (95%) tariffs were correct. An error in the coding for one procedure resulted in a higher tariff being assigned to a patient (total gain of £486, < 1%). Discussion: Orthopaedic departments create large Trust revenue. Accurate documentation and information transfer for coding is essential for payment by results to function correctly. Trusts which fail to do this will be financially penalised and surgeon league tables may not adequately reflect individual case complexity. We recommend all Trusts use the model established in unit B

We devised a four-part clinical risk classification system for patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (PTKR) to facilitate risk estimation. We retrospectively reviewed a series of consecutive PTKRs performed by the senior author. A classification system was devised to take account of principal risk factors in PTKR (Table 1). The patients were grouped accordingly, and the following were compared:. Length of stay. Postoperative complications. Early post discharge follow-up assessment. Multiple regression analysis was performed. This revealed:. Similar complication rates in the NCP and CPI groups. 3-fold and 4-fold increase in the cumulative risk in the CPII, and CPIII groups respectively (p< 0.001). Increased length of stay in the CPIII group (p< 0.001). Conclusion: This classification correlates well with complication rates from surgery, and has a role in stratifying patients for preoperative planning and risk counselling. It is reproducible and can be used for larger patient groups via the National Joint Registry. Our findings also have implications for payment by results and fixed tariffs for PTKR

To assess concordance between hospital coding and clinician coding for patients undergoing spinal instrumentation procedures and determine if our coding systems result in accurate financial reimbursement from the primary care trust (PCT). We conducted a one year retrospective review of 41 patients who underwent spinal instrumentation procedures. Data collected from IT systems included: operation description, clinician procedure code, hospital procedure code, Hospital Health Resource grouping (HRG), clinician HRG, instrumentation costs and PCT reimbursement fees. From this data we compared coding based re-imbursement fees and actual surgical costs, taking into account exact instrumentation prices. In all cases the primary hospital and clinician coding values differed. Using the clinician code would have altered the HRG group in 16 patients. Using solely clinician coding would have generated less financial reimbursement than using hospital coding. In 23 patients undergoing complex spinal procedures, instrumentation costs represented a significant proportion of the final fee obtained from the PCT, thus leaving a small proportion for the associated hospital stay costs. This suggests instrumentation costs are inadequately reimbursed from the PCT. Hospital coding appears more accurate than clinician coding and results in greater financial reimbursement. On the whole, we found there to be insufficient reimbursement from the PCT. The variable and sometimes substantial cost of spinal instrumentation procedures results in inadequate reimbursement for many procedures. We feel the payment by results (PBR) scheme is suboptimal for such procedures and adequate reimbursement can only be achieved by direct billing on an individual case basis

Aims. To devise a simple clinical risk classification system for patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (PTKR) to facilitate risk and cost estimation, and aid pre-operative planning. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed a series of consecutive PTKRs performed by the senior author. A classification system was devised to take account of principal risk factors in PTKR. Four groups were devised: 1) Non complex PTKR (CP0): no local or systemic complicating factors; 2) CPI: Locally complex: Severe or fixed deformity and/or bone loss, previous bony surgery or trauma, or ligamentous instability; 3) CPII Systemic complicating factors: Medical co-morbidity, steroid or immunosuppressant therapy, High BMI, (equivalent to ASA of III or more); 3) CPIII: Combination of local and systemic complicating factors (CPI+CPII). The patients were grouped accordingly and the following were compared: 1) length of stay, 2) post-operative complications, and 3) early post-discharge follow-up assessment. The complications were divided into local (wound problems, DVT, sepsis) and systemic (cardiopulmonary, metabolic, and systemic thromboembolic) complications. Results. The total number of patients was 119 (CP0=37,CPI=19,CPII=30,CPIII=33). Multiple regression analysis revealed: 1) no significant difference between complication rates in the CP0 and CPI groups, 2) 3-fold and 4-fold increase in the cumulative risk in the CPII and CPIII groups respectively (p<0.001), 3) significantly increased length of stay in the CPII and CPIII groups (p<0.001). Conclusion. The groups in this classification system correlate well with complication rates from surgery. As such this system has a role in stratifying patients for pre-operative planning and risk counselling. It is reproducible and can be used for larger patient groups via the National Joint Registry. Our findings also have implications for payment by results and fixed tariffs for PTKR, as the higher complication rates in the CPII and CPIII groups are likely to attract greater expense by hospitals in the course of these patients' treatment

Introduction: Since the introduction of payment by results in the NHS in 2004, the accurate recording of services performed has played a crucial role in reimbursement to hospital trusts by primary care trusts (PCT). Failure to accurately charge for these services causes a shortfall in funding received. Under the new reimbursement system, similar treatments are grouped together under the same tariff and referred to as a Healthcare Resource Group (HRG). Coding is the assignment of procedures to HRG’s. We aim to assess the accuracy of coding performed at our institution and link this directly to the funds received from the PCT. Foot and ankle surgery has a particular interest in coding due to the multiple codes that are utilised to code for one procedure. Method: We looked at 40 consecutive operations performed at our institution. We compared the codes assigned by the surgeon placing the patient on the waiting list, which were the codes seen directly on the operating list with the final codes given to the PCT. We compared the two codes and looked at the difference in final costing. Results: There were a total of 75 codes from the 40 operations assigned by the surgeon compared with 103 codes assigned by the coding staff. Although most of the codes were different when the final costing data was generated there was little difference in the overall costs. Discussion: The importance of accurate coding has become paramount in the current national health service funding. We have shown large discrepancies between the codes the surgeon produces and the final code given to the PCT. Although, in our unit, this has not led to differing final reimbursement figures, it does have the potential to create inaccuracies with a failure to pay for work performed. We will present our data and describe the correct coding for common procedures in foot and ankle surgery, to allow accurate reimbursement

Introduction: To train the surgeon adds to the length of procedures and this is currently not accounted for, in the finance received to perform the operation by the hospital. Objective: Our study focussed on these main questions:. What is the effect on the length of a procedure when a trainee is involved?. What is the effect on the length of a list and the number of procedures performed on the list when a trainee is involved?. What percentage of cases had trainee involvement for anaesthetics and surgery?. Is this is statistically significant?. Method: Data was taken from two different sources, firstly, the ORMIS theatre system and patient operation notes. These were used to determine the length of six different types of orthopaedic procedures and the level of the main surgeon. This was collected in Stepping Hill hospital, Stockport, United Kingdom between June and July 2008. The second source used was a consultant’s logbook comprising 227 primary total knee replacements between 2004 and 2008. Results: The data collected via the ORMIS system produced trends suggesting trainees took longer to perform procedures than consultants. The data from the consultant logbook statistically proved this. List times appeared unaffected by trainee presence. In Orthopaedic surgeries, 92% times trainees were present during the procedure and out of this 17% cases were performed by trainees. For total hip replacements done by trainees the procedure took significantly longer surgical time than consultant performed procedures (p = 0.0337). Among these cases, 71% were performed by senior trainees. The consultant’s log book data also suggested the similar trends. In all comparisions, time taken by trainees to perform surgeries were statistically significant. Trainee performed with consultant scrubbed versus consultant performed (P = < 0.0001), trainee performed with consultant in theatre versus consultant performed(P = 0.0318) and trainee performed with consultant scrubbed versus trainee performed with consultant in theatre (P = 0.002). Discussion and Conclusion: Hospitals are paid a fixed fees per operation due to introduction of payment by results system as they are paid a fixed tariff for a particular procedure. Training increases the length of a procedure and therefore in an efficient structured environment prevents as many cases being done on a list. Therefore, training future surgeons costs the hospital money. To counter this, training hospitals should be given financial incentives to train in surgery, or procedures performed by trainees should be priced differently to account for the time lost by training

Aims

The British Spine Registry (BSR) was introduced in May 2012 to be used as a web-based database for spinal surgeries carried out across the UK. Use of this database has been encouraged but not compulsory, which has led to a variable level of engagement in the UK. In 2019 NHS England and NHS Improvement introduced a new Best Practice Tariff (BPT) to encourage input of spinal surgical data on the BSR. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of the spinal BPT on compliance with the recording of surgical data on the BSR.

Aims

The aims of this study were to estimate the cost of surgical treatment of fractures of the proximal humerus using a micro-costing methodology, contrast this cost with the national reimbursement tariff and establish the major determinants of cost.

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a complex procedure which carries both a greater risk for patients and greater cost for the treating hospital than does a primary TKA. As well as the increased cost of peri-operative investigations, blood transfusions, surgical instrumentation, implants and operating time, there is a well-documented increased length of stay which accounts for most of the actual costs associated with surgery.

We compared revision surgery for infection with revision for other causes (pain, instability, aseptic loosening and fracture). Complete clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 168 consecutive revision TKAs performed at a tertiary referral centre between 2005 and 2012.

Revision surgery for infection was associated with a mean length of stay more than double that of aseptic cases (21.5 vs 9.5 days, p < 0.0001). The mean cost of a revision for infection was more than three times that of an aseptic revision (£30 011 (sd 4514) vs £9655 (sd 599.7), p < 0.0001).

Current NHS tariffs do not fully reimburse the increased costs of providing a revision knee surgery service. Moreover, especially as greater costs are incurred for infected cases. These losses may adversely affect the provision of revision surgery in the NHS.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:197–201.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to assess functional outcome and patient satisfaction. They provide a framework for comparisons between surgical units, and individual surgeons for benchmarking and financial remuneration. Better performance may bring the reward of more customers as patients and commissioners seek out high performers for their elective procedures. Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data linked to PROMs we identified 22 691 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) undertaken for osteoarthritis in England and Wales between August 2008 and February 2011, and identified the surgical factors that influenced the improvements in the Oxford knee score (OKS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) assessment using multiple regression analysis. After correction for patient factors the only surgical factors that influenced PROMs were implant brand and hospital type (both p < 0.001). However, the effects of surgical factors upon the PROMs were modest compared with patient factors. For both the OKS and the EQ-5D the most important factors influencing the improvement in PROMs were the corresponding pre-operative score and the patient’s general health status. Despite having only a small effect on PROMs, this study has shown that both implant brand and hospital type do influence reported subjective functional scores following TKR. In the current climate of financial austerity, proposed performance-based remuneration and wider patient choice, it would seem unwise to ignore these effects and the influence of a range of additional patient factors.

The aim of this study was to examine the rates and potential risk factors for 28-day re-admission following a fracture of the hip at a high-volume tertiary care hospital. We retrospectively reviewed 467 consecutive patients with a fracture of the hip treated in the course of one year. Causes and risk factors for unplanned 28-day re-admissions were examined using univariate and multivariate analysis, including the difference in one-year mortality. A total of 55 patients (11.8%) were re-admitted within 28 days of discharge. The most common causes were pneumonia in 15 patients (27.3%), dehydration and renal dysfunction in ten (18.2%) and deteriorating mobility in ten (18.2%). A moderate correlation was found between chest infection during the initial admission and subsequent re-admission with pneumonia (r = 0.44, p < 0.001). A significantly higher mortality rate at one year was seen in the re-admission group (41.8% (23 of 55) vs 18.7% (77 of 412), p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis identified advancing age, admission source, and the comorbidities of diabetes and neurological disorders as the strongest predictors for re-admission. Early re-admission following hip fracture surgery is predominantly due to medical causes and is associated with higher one-year mortality. The risk factors for re-admission can have implications for performance-based pay initiatives in the NHS. Multidisciplinary management in reducing post-operative active clinical problems may reduce early re-admission.

With the established success of the National Joint Registry and the emergence of a range of new national initiatives for the capture of electronic data in the National Health Service, orthopaedic surgery in the United Kingdom has found itself thrust to the forefront of an information revolution. In this review we consider the benefits and threats that this revolution poses, and how orthopaedic surgeons should marshal their resources to ensure that this is a force for good.