Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture currently shares a single Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code with RSA for arthropathy despite potential differences in patient factors, procedural demands, postoperative care and needs, and overall hospital systems’ resource utilization. We hyp...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2024-10
Hauptverfasser: Boubekri, Amir M., Scheidt, Michael, Farooq, Hassan, Oetojo, William, Shivdasani, Krishin, Garbis, Nickolas, Salazar, Dane
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery
container_volume
creator Boubekri, Amir M.
Scheidt, Michael
Farooq, Hassan
Oetojo, William
Shivdasani, Krishin
Garbis, Nickolas
Salazar, Dane
description Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture currently shares a single Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code with RSA for arthropathy despite potential differences in patient factors, procedural demands, postoperative care and needs, and overall hospital systems’ resource utilization. We hypothesize that patients indicated for RSA for fracture will have greater medical complexity, require longer operative duration, have higher complication rates, demonstrate inferior functional outcomes, and require greater health care cost expenditures compared to a cohort undergoing RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy. A total of 383 RSAs were retrospectively reviewed from January 2011 to December 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operative time, financial charge and cost data, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and all-cause revisions were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score and active range of motion (AROM) were evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. After exclusions, 197 total RSAs were included, with 28 for fracture and 169 for arthropathy indications. RSA operative time was longer for fractures with an average of 143.2 ± 33.7 minutes compared with 108.2 ± 33.9 minutes for arthropathy (P = .001). Average cost per patient for RSA for proximal humerus fracture was $2489 greater than the cost for RSA for elective indications; however, no statistically significant difference was noted between average costs (P = .126). LOS was longer for RSA for fracture compared to arthropathy, with a mean of 4.0 ± 3.6 days vs. 1.8 ± 2.3 days (P = .004). The fracture group was 3.6 times more likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility or inpatient rehabilitation (32% vs. 9%, P = .002). Early and late all-cause revisions were similar between groups. Differences in postoperative AROM for fracture vs. arthropathy were significant for active forward flexion at 2 months (95.5° ± 36.7° vs. 117.0° ± 32.3°, P = .020) and 6 months (110.9° ± 35.2° vs. 129.2° ± 28.3°, P = .020) as well as active adducted external rotation at 6 months (20.0° ± 20.9° vs. 33.1° ± 12.3°, P = .007) and at 12 months (23.3° ± 18.1° vs. 34.5° ± 13.8°, P = .012). No difference in VAS pain scores were noted between fracture and arthropathy groups at any time point. RSA for fractures vs. arthropathy have substantial differences in patient characteristics, surgical complexity, and hospital resource utilization. This is of importance given the currently available CPT code does not
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.037
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3118834474</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1058274624007687</els_id><sourcerecordid>3118834474</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1502-50e66bae73bb7f63085f09a027c576a0f686a0feb589a6c0d9fa36a2e40695133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc2O0zAURiMEYv54ADbIy2GRcG3HTiJWqAIGaaQZoc7acpwb6iqJy3VS0Seb18NVC0vY2JZ17mf5O1n2lkPBgesP22IbsRAgygLqAmT1IrvkSopcK4CX6QyqzkVV6ovsKsYtADQliNfZhWxKUVVSXGbP33GPFJHFTViGDolZmjcUdoON84H1gdiOwi8_2oFtlhFpiawn6-aFMDI7dYz-G4ADutnvkfmp887OPkzxjLONTfcRd5bsjGy1EOE0s0cKDruF0qNrpNFPYQg_Dux29bh-z1zoMN5kr3o7RHxz3q-zpy-f16u7_P7h67fVp_vccQUiV4BatxYr2bZVryXUqofGgqicqrSFXtfHFVtVN1Y76JreSm0FlqAbxaW8zm5PuamFnwvG2Yw-OhwGO2FYopGc17Usy6pMKD-hjkKMhL3ZUeqNDoaDOfoyW5N8maMvA7VJvtLMu3P80o7Y_Z34IygBH08Apk_uPZKJzuOU2vGUWjVd8P-I_w125atc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3118834474</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Boubekri, Amir M. ; Scheidt, Michael ; Farooq, Hassan ; Oetojo, William ; Shivdasani, Krishin ; Garbis, Nickolas ; Salazar, Dane</creator><creatorcontrib>Boubekri, Amir M. ; Scheidt, Michael ; Farooq, Hassan ; Oetojo, William ; Shivdasani, Krishin ; Garbis, Nickolas ; Salazar, Dane</creatorcontrib><description>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture currently shares a single Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code with RSA for arthropathy despite potential differences in patient factors, procedural demands, postoperative care and needs, and overall hospital systems’ resource utilization. We hypothesize that patients indicated for RSA for fracture will have greater medical complexity, require longer operative duration, have higher complication rates, demonstrate inferior functional outcomes, and require greater health care cost expenditures compared to a cohort undergoing RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy. A total of 383 RSAs were retrospectively reviewed from January 2011 to December 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operative time, financial charge and cost data, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and all-cause revisions were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score and active range of motion (AROM) were evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. After exclusions, 197 total RSAs were included, with 28 for fracture and 169 for arthropathy indications. RSA operative time was longer for fractures with an average of 143.2 ± 33.7 minutes compared with 108.2 ± 33.9 minutes for arthropathy (P = .001). Average cost per patient for RSA for proximal humerus fracture was $2489 greater than the cost for RSA for elective indications; however, no statistically significant difference was noted between average costs (P = .126). LOS was longer for RSA for fracture compared to arthropathy, with a mean of 4.0 ± 3.6 days vs. 1.8 ± 2.3 days (P = .004). The fracture group was 3.6 times more likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility or inpatient rehabilitation (32% vs. 9%, P = .002). Early and late all-cause revisions were similar between groups. Differences in postoperative AROM for fracture vs. arthropathy were significant for active forward flexion at 2 months (95.5° ± 36.7° vs. 117.0° ± 32.3°, P = .020) and 6 months (110.9° ± 35.2° vs. 129.2° ± 28.3°, P = .020) as well as active adducted external rotation at 6 months (20.0° ± 20.9° vs. 33.1° ± 12.3°, P = .007) and at 12 months (23.3° ± 18.1° vs. 34.5° ± 13.8°, P = .012). No difference in VAS pain scores were noted between fracture and arthropathy groups at any time point. RSA for fractures vs. arthropathy have substantial differences in patient characteristics, surgical complexity, and hospital resource utilization. This is of importance given the currently available CPT code does not differentiate indications for RSA, especially if intending to accurately document the surgical care delivered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.037</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39427732</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>arthropathy ; ASES score ; Current Procedural Terminology codes ; patient reported outcome measures ; proximal humerus fractures ; range of motion ; Reverse shoulder arthroplasty ; VAS score</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2024-10</ispartof><rights>2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1502-50e66bae73bb7f63085f09a027c576a0f686a0feb589a6c0d9fa36a2e40695133</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3651-3540 ; 0000-0002-5296-6822 ; 0000-0003-4940-6055 ; 0000-0001-8582-4065 ; 0000-0003-1036-6754</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.037$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39427732$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boubekri, Amir M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scheidt, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farooq, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oetojo, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shivdasani, Krishin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garbis, Nickolas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salazar, Dane</creatorcontrib><title>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture currently shares a single Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code with RSA for arthropathy despite potential differences in patient factors, procedural demands, postoperative care and needs, and overall hospital systems’ resource utilization. We hypothesize that patients indicated for RSA for fracture will have greater medical complexity, require longer operative duration, have higher complication rates, demonstrate inferior functional outcomes, and require greater health care cost expenditures compared to a cohort undergoing RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy. A total of 383 RSAs were retrospectively reviewed from January 2011 to December 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operative time, financial charge and cost data, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and all-cause revisions were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score and active range of motion (AROM) were evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. After exclusions, 197 total RSAs were included, with 28 for fracture and 169 for arthropathy indications. RSA operative time was longer for fractures with an average of 143.2 ± 33.7 minutes compared with 108.2 ± 33.9 minutes for arthropathy (P = .001). Average cost per patient for RSA for proximal humerus fracture was $2489 greater than the cost for RSA for elective indications; however, no statistically significant difference was noted between average costs (P = .126). LOS was longer for RSA for fracture compared to arthropathy, with a mean of 4.0 ± 3.6 days vs. 1.8 ± 2.3 days (P = .004). The fracture group was 3.6 times more likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility or inpatient rehabilitation (32% vs. 9%, P = .002). Early and late all-cause revisions were similar between groups. Differences in postoperative AROM for fracture vs. arthropathy were significant for active forward flexion at 2 months (95.5° ± 36.7° vs. 117.0° ± 32.3°, P = .020) and 6 months (110.9° ± 35.2° vs. 129.2° ± 28.3°, P = .020) as well as active adducted external rotation at 6 months (20.0° ± 20.9° vs. 33.1° ± 12.3°, P = .007) and at 12 months (23.3° ± 18.1° vs. 34.5° ± 13.8°, P = .012). No difference in VAS pain scores were noted between fracture and arthropathy groups at any time point. RSA for fractures vs. arthropathy have substantial differences in patient characteristics, surgical complexity, and hospital resource utilization. This is of importance given the currently available CPT code does not differentiate indications for RSA, especially if intending to accurately document the surgical care delivered.</description><subject>arthropathy</subject><subject>ASES score</subject><subject>Current Procedural Terminology codes</subject><subject>patient reported outcome measures</subject><subject>proximal humerus fractures</subject><subject>range of motion</subject><subject>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty</subject><subject>VAS score</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc2O0zAURiMEYv54ADbIy2GRcG3HTiJWqAIGaaQZoc7acpwb6iqJy3VS0Seb18NVC0vY2JZ17mf5O1n2lkPBgesP22IbsRAgygLqAmT1IrvkSopcK4CX6QyqzkVV6ovsKsYtADQliNfZhWxKUVVSXGbP33GPFJHFTViGDolZmjcUdoON84H1gdiOwi8_2oFtlhFpiawn6-aFMDI7dYz-G4ADutnvkfmp887OPkzxjLONTfcRd5bsjGy1EOE0s0cKDruF0qNrpNFPYQg_Dux29bh-z1zoMN5kr3o7RHxz3q-zpy-f16u7_P7h67fVp_vccQUiV4BatxYr2bZVryXUqofGgqicqrSFXtfHFVtVN1Y76JreSm0FlqAbxaW8zm5PuamFnwvG2Yw-OhwGO2FYopGc17Usy6pMKD-hjkKMhL3ZUeqNDoaDOfoyW5N8maMvA7VJvtLMu3P80o7Y_Z34IygBH08Apk_uPZKJzuOU2vGUWjVd8P-I_w125atc</recordid><startdate>20241018</startdate><enddate>20241018</enddate><creator>Boubekri, Amir M.</creator><creator>Scheidt, Michael</creator><creator>Farooq, Hassan</creator><creator>Oetojo, William</creator><creator>Shivdasani, Krishin</creator><creator>Garbis, Nickolas</creator><creator>Salazar, Dane</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3651-3540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5296-6822</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4940-6055</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8582-4065</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1036-6754</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241018</creationdate><title>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes</title><author>Boubekri, Amir M. ; Scheidt, Michael ; Farooq, Hassan ; Oetojo, William ; Shivdasani, Krishin ; Garbis, Nickolas ; Salazar, Dane</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1502-50e66bae73bb7f63085f09a027c576a0f686a0feb589a6c0d9fa36a2e40695133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>arthropathy</topic><topic>ASES score</topic><topic>Current Procedural Terminology codes</topic><topic>patient reported outcome measures</topic><topic>proximal humerus fractures</topic><topic>range of motion</topic><topic>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty</topic><topic>VAS score</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boubekri, Amir M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scheidt, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farooq, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oetojo, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shivdasani, Krishin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garbis, Nickolas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salazar, Dane</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boubekri, Amir M.</au><au>Scheidt, Michael</au><au>Farooq, Hassan</au><au>Oetojo, William</au><au>Shivdasani, Krishin</au><au>Garbis, Nickolas</au><au>Salazar, Dane</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2024-10-18</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture currently shares a single Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code with RSA for arthropathy despite potential differences in patient factors, procedural demands, postoperative care and needs, and overall hospital systems’ resource utilization. We hypothesize that patients indicated for RSA for fracture will have greater medical complexity, require longer operative duration, have higher complication rates, demonstrate inferior functional outcomes, and require greater health care cost expenditures compared to a cohort undergoing RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy. A total of 383 RSAs were retrospectively reviewed from January 2011 to December 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operative time, financial charge and cost data, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and all-cause revisions were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score and active range of motion (AROM) were evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. After exclusions, 197 total RSAs were included, with 28 for fracture and 169 for arthropathy indications. RSA operative time was longer for fractures with an average of 143.2 ± 33.7 minutes compared with 108.2 ± 33.9 minutes for arthropathy (P = .001). Average cost per patient for RSA for proximal humerus fracture was $2489 greater than the cost for RSA for elective indications; however, no statistically significant difference was noted between average costs (P = .126). LOS was longer for RSA for fracture compared to arthropathy, with a mean of 4.0 ± 3.6 days vs. 1.8 ± 2.3 days (P = .004). The fracture group was 3.6 times more likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility or inpatient rehabilitation (32% vs. 9%, P = .002). Early and late all-cause revisions were similar between groups. Differences in postoperative AROM for fracture vs. arthropathy were significant for active forward flexion at 2 months (95.5° ± 36.7° vs. 117.0° ± 32.3°, P = .020) and 6 months (110.9° ± 35.2° vs. 129.2° ± 28.3°, P = .020) as well as active adducted external rotation at 6 months (20.0° ± 20.9° vs. 33.1° ± 12.3°, P = .007) and at 12 months (23.3° ± 18.1° vs. 34.5° ± 13.8°, P = .012). No difference in VAS pain scores were noted between fracture and arthropathy groups at any time point. RSA for fractures vs. arthropathy have substantial differences in patient characteristics, surgical complexity, and hospital resource utilization. This is of importance given the currently available CPT code does not differentiate indications for RSA, especially if intending to accurately document the surgical care delivered.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39427732</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.037</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3651-3540</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5296-6822</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4940-6055</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8582-4065</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1036-6754</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-2746
ispartof Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2024-10
issn 1058-2746
1532-6500
1532-6500
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3118834474
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects arthropathy
ASES score
Current Procedural Terminology codes
patient reported outcome measures
proximal humerus fractures
range of motion
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty
VAS score
title Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for elective indications should have separate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T22%3A19%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reverse%20shoulder%20arthroplasty%20for%20proximal%20humerus%20fractures%20and%20reverse%20shoulder%20arthroplasty%20for%20elective%20indications%20should%20have%20separate%20Current%20Procedural%20Terminology%20(CPT)%20codes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Boubekri,%20Amir%20M.&rft.date=2024-10-18&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.037&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3118834474%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3118834474&rft_id=info:pmid/39427732&rft_els_id=S1058274624007687&rfr_iscdi=true