Comparable PROM Gains and Satisfaction After TKA in Medicare Advantage vs. Traditional Medicare: A Multivariable Analysis of 6,010 Patients.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Benjamin E Jevnikar, Khaled A Elmenawi, Yuxuan Jin, Shujaa T Khan, Nicolas S Piuzzi
{"title":"Comparable PROM Gains and Satisfaction After TKA in Medicare Advantage vs. Traditional Medicare: A Multivariable Analysis of 6,010 Patients.","authors":"Benjamin E Jevnikar, Khaled A Elmenawi, Yuxuan Jin, Shujaa T Khan, Nicolas S Piuzzi","doi":"10.1055/a-2693-0702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As value-based care reshapes the landscape of orthopedic surgery, understanding how insurance type influences patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasingly important. While Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) differ significantly in structure and access, limited data exist comparing functional outcomes between these groups. This retrospective cohort study used a prospectively collected institutional registry to evaluate 6,010 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent primary TKA between 2016 and 2023. Patients were categorized by insurance type (TM or MA) at the time of surgery. Primary PROMs included the KOOS pain, physical function shortform (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) subscales. Clinically meaningful improvement was assessed using minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the independent association between insurance type and each outcome, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic covariates. At baseline, MA patients had significantly lower KOOS pain, PS, and JR (<i>p</i> < 0.001). However, by 1-year follow-up, both groups achieved similar KOOS pain and PS scores, and comparable PROM improvements from baseline. MA patients had slightly lower KOOS JR scores (<i>p</i> = 0.006) at 1-year, but equivalent odds of achieving MCID, PASS, and SCB thresholds across all KOOS domains after multivariable adjustment. Patient satisfaction at 1 year also did not differ by Medicare plan type (<i>p</i> = 0.729). Despite presenting with worse baseline functional status, MA patients achieved similar postoperative outcomes, PROM gains, and satisfaction as their TM counterparts. These findings suggest that MA enrollment does not negatively impact patient-perceived benefit after TKA and may not warrant differential risk-adjustment in PROM-based value assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":48798,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Knee Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Knee Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2693-0702","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As value-based care reshapes the landscape of orthopedic surgery, understanding how insurance type influences patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasingly important. While Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) differ significantly in structure and access, limited data exist comparing functional outcomes between these groups. This retrospective cohort study used a prospectively collected institutional registry to evaluate 6,010 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent primary TKA between 2016 and 2023. Patients were categorized by insurance type (TM or MA) at the time of surgery. Primary PROMs included the KOOS pain, physical function shortform (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) subscales. Clinically meaningful improvement was assessed using minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the independent association between insurance type and each outcome, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic covariates. At baseline, MA patients had significantly lower KOOS pain, PS, and JR (p < 0.001). However, by 1-year follow-up, both groups achieved similar KOOS pain and PS scores, and comparable PROM improvements from baseline. MA patients had slightly lower KOOS JR scores (p = 0.006) at 1-year, but equivalent odds of achieving MCID, PASS, and SCB thresholds across all KOOS domains after multivariable adjustment. Patient satisfaction at 1 year also did not differ by Medicare plan type (p = 0.729). Despite presenting with worse baseline functional status, MA patients achieved similar postoperative outcomes, PROM gains, and satisfaction as their TM counterparts. These findings suggest that MA enrollment does not negatively impact patient-perceived benefit after TKA and may not warrant differential risk-adjustment in PROM-based value assessments.

医疗保险优势与传统医疗保险TKA后PROM收益和满意度的比较:6010例患者的多变量分析。
随着基于价值的护理重塑骨科手术的景观,了解保险类型如何影响全膝关节置换术(TKA)后患者报告的结果(PROMs)变得越来越重要。虽然传统医疗保险(TM)和医疗保险优势(MA)在结构和可及性上存在显著差异,但比较这两组之间功能结局的数据有限。本回顾性队列研究使用前瞻性收集的机构注册表对2016年至2023年间接受初级TKA的6010名医疗保险受益人进行了评估。患者在手术时按保险类型(TM或MA)进行分类。初级PROMs包括kos疼痛、物理功能短表(PS)和关节置换(JR)量表。采用最小临床重要差异(MCID)、实质性临床获益(SCB)和患者可接受症状状态(PASS)阈值评估临床意义改善。采用多变量逻辑回归来评估保险类型与每个结果之间的独立关联,调整人口统计学、临床和社会经济协变量。在基线时,MA患者在1年的KOOS疼痛、PS和JR显著降低(p p = 0.006),但在多变量调整后,在所有KOOS领域达到MCID、PASS和SCB阈值的几率相同。不同医疗保险计划类型的患者1年满意度也无差异(p = 0.729)。尽管MA患者表现出较差的基线功能状态,但与TM患者相比,MA患者获得了相似的术后结果、PROM收益和满意度。这些研究结果表明,入组MA并不会对TKA后患者感知的获益产生负面影响,也不能保证在基于prom的价值评估中进行差异风险调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: The Journal of Knee Surgery covers a range of issues relating to the orthopaedic techniques of arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and reconstructive surgery of the knee joint. In addition to original peer-review articles, this periodical provides details on emerging surgical techniques, as well as reviews and special focus sections. Topics of interest include cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction, bone grafting, cartilage regeneration, and magnetic resonance imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信