Closed ankle fractures have been reported to account for 10% off all fractures presenting to the Emergency Department. Many of these injuries require acute surgical management either via direct admission or through defined outpatient surgical pathways. While both methods have been shown to be safe, few studies have examined the cost effectiveness of each clinical scenario. The purpose of this study is to compare cost and resource utilization associated with inpatient and outpatient ankle fracture surgery at a Canadian academic institution.

This is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent acute ankle fracture surgery at London Health Sciences Centre between 2016 and 2018. Thirty patients who underwent inpatient ankle surgery for closed, isolated ankle fractures at University Hospital were compared to 30 consecutive patients who underwent outpatient ankle surgery for similar fractures at Victoria hospital. Data pertaining to age at time of surgery, sex, BMI, fracture type, operating/recovery room time, and length of hospital stay were collected. All emergency room visits, readmissions and complications within 30 days of surgery were also recorded.

Inpatient and outpatient cohorts were similar with respect to average age (48 vs. 44, P=0.326) and body mass index (29.8 vs. 29.1, P=0.741). There was a greater proportion of patients with an American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) Classification of 3 or greater in the inpatient surgery group (48% vs. 23%). The inpatient group spent an average of 1.2 days in hospital while waiting for surgery and a average of 72 hours in hospital for their entire surgical encounter. The outpatient group spent an average of eight days (at home) waiting for surgery while spending an average of 7.4 hours in hospital during their entire surgical encounter. Outpatient ankle fracture surgery was associated with a cost savings of 35.9% in comparison to inpatient ankle fracture surgery (P < 0 .001). There were no significant differences in the rates of emergency room visits, readmissions, or complications between cohorts.

Preliminary findings suggest that outpatient ankle fracture surgery is appropriate for most patients, requires less hospital resources and is associated with similar rates of readmission and complications as inpatient surgery. An established outpatient surgical pathway may offer significant cost savings in the treatment of the common closed ankle fracture that requires surgical intervention.

Background

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become one of the most commonly performed elective procedures. Today, there are nearly 50 000 annual hospitalizations for hip replacement surgery in Canada. This number is projected to increase significantly with the aging population. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the 3rd leading cause of failure following THA and is reported to occur at an incidence of 1–3%. A two-stage revision THA is the current gold standard treatment and this has a tremendous economic impact on the healthcare system. The purpose of this study is to create an accurate cost estimate of two-stage revision THA and, in turn, evaluate the economic burden of PJI as it compares to primary THA in a Canadian healthcare context.

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become one of the most commonly performed elective procedures. Today, there are nearly 50 000 annual hospitalisations for hip replacement surgery in Canada. This number is projected to increase significantly with the aging population. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the 3rd leading cause of failure following THA and is reported to occur at an incidence of 1–3%. A two-stage re-vision THA is the current gold standard treatment and this has a tremendous economic impact on the healthcare system. The purpose of this study is to create an accurate cost estimate of two-stage revision THA and, in turn, evaluate the economic burden of PJI as it compares to primary THA in a Canadian healthcare context.

We conducted a retrospective review of primary THA cases and two-stage revision THA for PJI at our institution. Patients were matched for age and BMI. We recorded all costs associated with each procedure, including: OR time, equipment, length of hospital stay, readmission rates, and any other inpatient resource use. Unit costs were obtained using administrative data from the case costing department at London Health Sciences Centre. Billing fees associated with the procedure were obtained from the Ontario Schedule of Benefits. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the demographic characteristics of patients, hospital costs and resource use data. Patients with PJI were compared to the matched cohort of primary THA using the t-test (for continuous variables), and the chi-square test (for categorical variables).

Twenty consecutive cases of revision THA were matched to 20 patients who underwent uncomplicated primary THA between 2006 and 2014. Periprosthetic infection was associated with a significant increase in hospital stay (26.5 vs. 2.0; p<0.001), clinic visits (9.5 vs. 3.8; p<0.001), readmission rates (12 vs. 1; p<0.001) and overall cost ($39 953 vs. $7 460; p<0.001) in comparison to the primary arthroplasty cohort.

Two-stage revision for infected THA is a significant economic burden to the healthcare system. Our data suggests a 5-fold increase in healthcare cost when compared to primary THA. This may be an important consideration when distributing resources among Canadian tertiary care centres.