Where Are We Now?
With increasing pressure on healthcare budgets around the globe, it is vital for healthcare providers to demonstrate that their procedures deliver value [8]. If we want to improve the value of healthcare, we will need to institute substantial cost-saving measures [3]. Adverse events in hospitals are estimated to affect one in 10 patients [2], and the economic impact of events like infections, adverse-drug events, and surgical complications is substantial. If we could reduce their frequency, cost savings would likely follow.
There are potential risk factors for complications following total shoulder arthroplasty [1], a procedure that has more than tripled in incidence in the last 10 years [6]. Reducing adverse events and readmissions after surgery are two key areas that warrant close attention when improving surgical services [4, 5].
The current study by Bernstein and colleagues compared two models that predict unplanned readmission rates and adverse events after total shoulder arthroplasty. Traditionally, clinicians identify potential risk factors by highlighting the phenotypic traits of their patients and subjecting the data to regression analyses. The disadvantage to this is that other factors deemed unimportant might be overlooked. By preoperatively identifying patients with characteristics that might lead to a higher risk of adverse events or readmissions, these models can potentially modify the risk factors ahead of treatment.
Where Do We Need To Go?
According to the current study, statistically derived risk-stratification models perform better than those derived from clinical suspicion alone. However, it is still unclear how accurate, comprehensive, or appropriate the variables collected within large databases can be. When working with large databases, we have to balance the inclusion of too many variables (risking in inclusion of inaccurate data), with the omission of data that might identify crucial clinical characteristics.
One area of concern is knowing what to do with the risk factors identified in the preoperative period. Some might be modifiable, such as those in studies that demonstrated the benefits of quitting smoking [8]. However, many of the variables identified in the current study may not be modifiable. Does this mean that we prevent elderly males from undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty due to their risk for complications and readmissions? Do we introduce an additional cost proportional to their identified high-risk status? With increased operating time identified as a risk factor for adverse events in this study, should we be assessing surgeons’ speed of operating? (I suspect this statistic relates to intraoperative complications slowing operative time, rather than the sluggishness of the clinician.)
Data from large databases is only an asset if it is relevant and usable. To enhance the data we extract from such databases, it will be essential to gain a consensus on content and variables that need collecting. We also need to know how to effectively process data to provide knowledge for clinicians and benefits for our patients.
How Do We Get There?
A previous study on national arthroplasty registers highlighted the importance of a collaborative approach to using databases [7]. However, this study highlighted the inconsistences of datasets from various contributing sources. We need to aspire towards international standardization of the most appropriate variables to include in large databases. There will need to be thorough validation of these items, how they relate to patient outcomes, and their relevance in the population of interest. The content of databases should be developed through collaboration between national societies, organizations and registry groups which in turn should improve standards of data collections and data quality.
Instead of needing copious randomized trials to explore the concept of risk stratification and “evidence-based practice,” it will be “practice-based evidence”—using robust, prospectively maintained databases—that will prevail and be the more successful strategy. Prospective studies could identify strategies to modify the risk factors associated with total shoulder arthroplasty, as well as determine whether identifying risk factors does indeed modify the outcome for this patient population.
References
Anthony CA, Westermann RW, Gao Y, Pugely AJ, Wolf BR, Hettrich CM. What are risk factors for 30-day morbidity and transfusion in total shoulder arthroplasty? A review of 1922 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:2099–2105.
de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, Gouma DJ, Boermeester MA. The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: A systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17:216–223.
Etchells E, Koo M, Daneman N, McDonald A, Baker M, Matlow A, Krahn M, Mittmann N. Comparative economic analyses of patient safety improvement strategies in acute care: A systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21:448–456.
Jencks SF, Williams MV, Coleman EA. Rehospitalizations among patients in the Medicare fee-for-service program. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1418–1428.
Joynt KE, Orav EJ, Jha AK. Thirty-day readmission rates for Medicare beneficiaries by race and site of care. JAMA. 2011;305:675–681.
Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:2249–2254.
Makela KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P, Fenstad AM, Havelin L, Engesaeter L, Furnes O, Pedersen AB, Overgaard S, Karrholm J, Malchau H, Garellick G, Ranstam J, Eskelinen A. Failure rate of cemented and uncemented total hip replacements: Register study of combined Nordic database of four nations. BMJ. 2014;348:f7592.
Virani NA, Williams CD, Clark R, Polikandriotis J, Downes KL, Frankle MA. Preparing for the bundled-payment initiative: The cost and clinical outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty for the surgical treatment of glenohumeral arthritis at an average 4-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22:1601–1611.
Wong J, Lam DP, Abrishami A, Chan MT, Chung F. Short-term preoperative smoking cessation and postoperative complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2012;59:268–279.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This CORR Insights® is a commentary on the article “Perioperative Risk Adjustment for Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Are Simple Clinically Driven Models Sufficient?” by Bernstein and colleagues available at: DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-5147-y.
The author certifies that neither he, nor any members of his immediate family, have any commercial associations (such as consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.
The opinions expressed are those of the writers, and do not reflect the opinion or policy of CORR ® or The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons®.
This CORR Insights® comment refers to the article available at DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-5147-y.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Peach, C. CORR Insights®: Perioperative Risk Adjustment for Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Are Simple Clinically Driven Models Sufficient?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475, 2875–2877 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-5199-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-5199-z