Conference PaperPDF Available

The Financial Burden of Cancelled Surgeries: Implications for Performance Improvement

Authors:

Figures

Content may be subject to copyright.
The Financial Burden of Cancelled Surgeries: Implications for
Performance Improvement
Claudia Campbell, Ph.D., Arthur Mora, M.H.A., Stephanie Russo,
M.P.H., C.P.H., Nadira Abdur-Rahman, Nakeisha Pierre, M.D., Frank
Rosinia, M.D., Sabrina Bent, M.D., M.S.
Introduction: Cancellations in the operating room (OR) contribute
to decreased OR efficiency and therefore impact revenue. While a
number of studies have examined the sources of cancellation of
elective surgical procedures, few studies have estimated the costs
associated with these cancellations in a US academic medical center.
Understanding the magnitude of these opportunity costs can be
used to justify the use of more resources to prevent cancelled
surgeries and to improve processes which contribute to
cancellations. This study examines the characteristics and costs of
the cancelled outpatient surgical procedures that occurred in a
single academic medical center in 2009. The procedures were
either cancelled after the patient arrived or because the patient
failed to show up (“no shows”) on the day of surgery.
Methods: Financial data and OR metrics from Tulane University
Medical Center in 2009 were analyzed following IRB approval. A
preliminary analysis reviewed 4876 scheduled elective outpatient
surgical procedures. Hospital revenue was calculated based on
Medicare payment rates. Commercial rates were discounted by
20% for revenue analysis.
Results: The overall cancellation rate, defined as patient “no
shows” plus cancellations after arrival divided by all scheduled
procedures, was 6.7 %, 327 of 4876 scheduled cases. Rates of
cancellation varied by specialty and by day of the week. (See Tables
1 and 2) 32.4 % of cancellations were attributed to “no shows.”
Using Medicare payment rates, estimated total hospital revenue
losses for cancelled surgeries, n= 327, was $1,487,850, or $4,550 per
cancelled case, in 2009. (See Table 3) In the 13.8% of the 327
cancelled cases where a reason was recorded, 44% of cancellations
were due to the patient being ill on the day of surgery, 24% to
patient failure to comply with pre-operative instructions and 31%
to institutional issues such as unavailability of beds or equipment.
Cancellations were higher among patients who did not have a
preoperative clinic visit, 10.64%, as compared to 3.92% of those
with preoperative clinic visits.
Table 1. Cancellation by Specialty
Specialty
Total, n
Cancelled
After Arrival, n
No shows, n
Cancellation Rate, %
Cardiology
13
2
0
15.38
General Surgery
1334
89
41
9.75
Neurosurgery
320
22
5
8.44
Obstetrics/Gynecology
51
1
0
1.96
Oncology
4
0
0
0
Ophthalmology
676
12
6
2.66
Orthopedics
1140
31
8
3.42
Otolaryngology
245
14
7
8.57
Pediatrics
156
13
1
8.97
Plastic Surgery
72
8
0
11.11
Radiology
64
9
5
21.88
Thoracic Surgery
202
23
1
11.88
Urology
599
23
6
4.84
Total
4876
247
80
Table 2. Cancellation by Day of the Week
Day of the Week
Total, n
Cancelled, n
Cancellation Rate, %
Monday
1204
77
6.40
Tuesday
1087
61
5.61
Wednesday
932
68
7.30
Thursday
951
76
7.99
Friday
702
45
6.41
Total
4876
327
6.74
Table 3. Loss Revenue by Specialty
Specialty
Total, n
Total Loss
Revenue, $
Revenue Loss
Per Case, $
General Surgery
45
211,810
4,707
Neurosurgery
2
2,825
1,412
Ophthalmology
11
40,712
3,701
Orthopedics
11
78,962
7,178
Otolaryngology
9
14,913
1,657
Pediatrics
6
34,186
5,697
Plastic Surgery
3
7,628
2,542
Radiology
6
13,156
2,193
Thoracic Surgery
7
38,804
5,543
Urology
4
30,179
7,545
Total
104
473,175
4,550
Conclusions: A significant amount of revenue is lost from
cancelled cases. Costs of cancellations in some specialties have
greater impact than others. Pre-operative visits have the potential
to prevent cancellations, increasing productivity and improving
financial performance. Further research is needed to understand
how to reduce cancellations associated with problems originating in
the hospital or physician practice.
Summary: Cancelled elective outpatient surgical procedures result
in opportunity costs which can be substantial. This revenue loss
may support the allocation of additional resources toward
perioperative services and process improvements aimed at
decreasing cancellations.
... 7,9,10 Surgical cancellation is another source of high costs to the healthcare system. 11 A 2011 study from Tulane University found nearly $1.5 million in lost revenue due to cancelled surgeries in a single year. 11 Cancellations are often due to patient-related factorsincluding illness, failure to comply with preoperative instructions, inconvenient appointments and patients believing they are unfit for surgerywith estimates for patient-related reasons for cancellation as high as 68%. ...
... 11 A 2011 study from Tulane University found nearly $1.5 million in lost revenue due to cancelled surgeries in a single year. 11 Cancellations are often due to patient-related factorsincluding illness, failure to comply with preoperative instructions, inconvenient appointments and patients believing they are unfit for surgerywith estimates for patient-related reasons for cancellation as high as 68%. 11,12 Because total joint replacement is an elective surgical procedure with potentially long recovery times, these patients may be more prone to cancellation. ...
... 11 Cancellations are often due to patient-related factorsincluding illness, failure to comply with preoperative instructions, inconvenient appointments and patients believing they are unfit for surgerywith estimates for patient-related reasons for cancellation as high as 68%. 11,12 Because total joint replacement is an elective surgical procedure with potentially long recovery times, these patients may be more prone to cancellation. 12 Though there is not much literature on cancellation in total joint replacement surgeries, Campbell et al. found 3.4% of orthopedic surgeries were cancelled with the highest cost per case for any specialty at $7178 per cancellation. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Patient activation and engagement can improve outcomes of medical and surgical care by increasing involvement of patients in their care plan. We designed a digital engagement tool to improve surgical cancellation and post-surgical outcomes for adult patients undergoing total joint replacements by providing patient education materials via email or text, in small increments throughout the perioperative period. Methods We assessed the tool's impact using a quasi-experimental design comparing patients scheduled for surgery January–June 2017 (pre-intervention) versus January–June 2018 (post-intervention). Post-intervention patients with digital contact information in the medical record were automatically enrolled. We extracted de-identified administrative data for all patients during both time periods and utilized an intent-to-treat approach including all post-intervention patients regardless of enrollment. Surgical cancellation and post-surgical outcomes (length of stay, discharge to home and revisits and readmissions) were compared between periods using adjusted regression models. We also examined associations between measures of engagement with the intervention and outcomes. Results A total of 2027 joint replacement patients were included (720 hip replacements; 1307 knee replacements). Adjusting for gender, age and insurance type, both hip and knee patients in the post-intervention group were more likely to have a cancelled surgery, but cancellations were less likely to be on the day of surgery compared to pre-intervention patients. Post-intervention patients were also less likely to have length of stay >2 days. Forty- three per cent of hip and 47% of knee patients in the post-period received the intervention and most were highly engaged. Higher engagement was associated with lower odds of surgical cancellation, shorter stays and higher odds of discharge home. Conclusion Findings suggest that utilization of a digital patient engagement tool translates into improved hospital efficiency and patient outcomes, particularly for those highly engaged.
Article
Full-text available
Η «κινητή υγεία» (mobile health) αποτελεί μια νέα μορφή ηλεκτρονικής υγείας με εφαρμογές διαθέσιμες και για τις υπηρεσίες υγείας, συμβάλλοντας στην παροχή φροντίδας σε ένα ευρύ φάσμα νοσολογικών οντοτήτων και ομάδων ασθενών. Η συνεισφορά των τηλεπικοινωνιών και των τεχνολογικών εφαρμογών στη χειρουργική φροντίδα έχει τεκμηριωθεί στην επιστημονική βιβλιογραφία. Σκοπός της παρούσας εργασίας ήταν να περιγράψει εφαρμογές κινητών τηλεφώνων στη φροντίδα του χειρουργικού ασθενή. Πραγματοποιήθηκε ανασκόπηση της σύγχρονης βιβλιογραφίας στη βάση δεδομένων PubMed /Medline και τη μηχανή αναζήτησης Google Scholar με τη χρήση των λέξεων-κλειδιών. Οι μελέτες εξήχθησαν σύμφωνα με κριτήρια επιλεξιμότητας, αναλύθηκαν και πραγματοποιήθηκε σύνθεση των αποτελεσμάτων τους. Από την ανασκόπηση της βιβλιογραφίας βρέθηκε πως η υποστήριξη της περιεγχειρητικής φροντίδας είναι εφικτή από τη χρήση εφαρμογών σε συσκευές κινητών τηλεφώνων. Υπάρχουν ενδείξεις ότι οι εφαρμογές αυτές διευκολύνουν και υποστηρίζουν τη φροντίδα του χειρουργικού ασθενή, ιδίως κατά την προεγχειρητική προετοιμασία και τη μετεγχειρητική παρακολούθηση. Η χρήση τους βρέθηκε να έχει θετικό αντίκτυπο για το χειρουργικό ασθενή, τους επαγγελματίες υγείας αλλά και τους οργανισμούς φροντίδας υγείας, ενισχύοντας την ασφάλεια και την ποιότητα, αλλά και ένα μοντέλο ασθενοκεντρικής προσέγγισης των παρεχόμενων υπηρεσιών φροντίδας υγείας. Επιπλέον, τα ευρήματα αυτά αποτελούν τη βάση για περαιτέρω έρευνα στο συνεχές της φροντίδας, από το νοσοκομείο έως τη φροντίδα μετά την έξοδο.
Article
Full-text available
Background: Smartphone applications (apps) are being increasingly utilized in the health care arena to improve patient care and outcomes. Objective: To further demonstrate the ability of a smartphone app to improve patient compliance with preoperative instructions and to decrease the number of last-minute surgery cancellations. Methods: Patients undergoing spine surgery were prospectively accrued. Smartphone app users were compared to non-app users. Patient adherence with preoperative instructions as well as last-minute surgery cancellations were analyzed. Results: All 85 app users adhered to preoperative instructions according to the acknowledgements sent to the web portal, and there were no cancelled surgeries. Among the 89 non-app users, there were five cancelled surgeries (5.6%). Conclusions: We demonstrate the ability of a smartphone application to improve patient adherence with preoperative instructions and decrease last-minute surgery cancellations.
Article
Objective: The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in the perioperative period. When surgeries are scheduled by surgeons and their staff at our large institution a presumed ASA-PS is chosen. This is because our institution (and, anecdotally, others in our hospital system and elsewhere), recognizing the relationship between higher ASA-PS and poorer postoperative outcomes, requires all patients with higher ASA-PS levels (≥3) to undergo enhanced preoperative workup. The patients may not, however, necessarily be seen in the anesthesia clinic prior to surgery. As a result, patients are assigned a presumed ASA-PS by a non-anesthesia provider (e.g., surgeons and physician extenders) that may not reflect the ASA-PS chosen by the anesthesiologist on the day of surgery. Errors in the accuracy of the ASA-PS prior to surgery lead to unnecessary and costly preoperative testing, delays in operative procedures, and potential case cancellations. Our study aimed to determine whether there are significant differences in the assignment of ASA-PS by non-anesthesia providers when compared to anesthesia providers. Design: We administered an IRB-approved survey asking the ASA-PS of 20 hypothetical case vignettes to 229 clinicians in various departments. Responses by non-anesthesia providers were compared to the consensus of the department of anesthesiology. Setting: Faculty office spaces and conferences. Patients: No patients, physicians only. Interventions: Survey administration. Measurements: ASA-PS scores acquired from surveys. Main results: Residents and faculty in the department of anesthesiology demonstrated no statistical difference in the median ASA score in 19/20 case scenarios. All other departments were statistically different when compared to the department of anesthesiology (p<0.05). The probability of a department either over- or under-rating the ASA-PS was calculated, and is summarized in Fig. 3. All departments, except anesthesiology, had a 30-40% chance of under-rating the ASA-PS of the patients in the clinical vignettes. Conclusions: Non-anesthesia providers assign ASA-PS with significantly less accuracy than do anesthesia providers, even when adjusted for multiple comparisons. Surgical and procedural departments were found to consistently under-rate the ASA-PS of patients in our clinical vignettes.
Article
Full-text available
Background: Many ideas have gone into the development of the concept of the Perioperative Surgical Home (PSH) and Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS). Many anesthesiologists have advocated for an increased role in operating room (OR) management, advancing from OR managers to OR directors with greater decision making and improved means of communication. However, there is little uniformity at present in the running of ORs around the country.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.