4.5 Article

Effect of provider volume on resource utilization for surgical procedures of the knee

Journal

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages 302-312

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-004-0516-6

Keywords

anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; meniscectomy; resource utilization; operating-room time; healthcare utilization project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Operating-room time and patient disposition on discharge are important determinants of healthcare resource utilization and cost. We examined the relation between these determinants and hospital/surgeon volume for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and meniscectomy procedures. Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction (18,390 cases) and meniscectomy (123,012 cases) were extracted from the State Ambulatory Surgery Databases for the years 1997-2000. Surgeon and hospital volume were divided into low-, intermediate-, and high-volume categories. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the adjusted association between surgeon and hospital volume and patient discharge status and operating-room time. Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction or meniscectomy performed by low-volume surgeons were significantly more likely to be non-routinely discharged as compared to high-volume surgeons (adjusted odds ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 1.7-7.2 for ACL reconstruction; adjusted odds ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.6-2.3 for meniscectomy). The mean operating-room time for performing ACL reconstruction or meniscectomy was significantly higher in low- and intermediate-volume surgeons and hospitals as compared to high-volume surgeons and hospitals (p <= 0.001). High-volume providers utilize healthcare resources more efficiently. Our findings may help surgeons and hospitals in optimizing resource utilization and cost for routinely-performed ambulatory surgery procedures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available