Primary total hip replacement versus hip resurfacing - hospital considerations.

Abstract

Multiple factors regarding surgical procedures and patient selection affect hospital staffing needs as well as hospital revenues. In order to better understand the potential impact on hospitals that hip arthroplasty device selection (standard total hip arthroplasty vs. resurfacing) creates, a review of all primary hip arthroplasties performed at one institution was designed to identify factors that impacted hospital staffing needs and revenue generation. All primary hip arthroplasties undertaken over three fiscal years (2008 to 2010) were reviewed, utilizing only hospital business office data and medical records data that had been previously extracted prior for billing purposes. Analysis confirmed differing demographics for two hip arthroplasty populations, with the resurfacing patients (compared to the conventional total hip arthroplasty population) consisting of younger patients (mean age, 50 vs. 61 years), who were more often male (75% vs. 45%), were more likely to have osteoarthritis as their primary diagnosis (83 vs. 67%) and were more often covered by managed care or commercial insurance (83 vs. 34%). They also had shorter hospital stays (mean length of stay, 2.3 vs. 4.1 days) and consequently provided a more favorable financial revenue stream to the hospital on a per patient basis. Several trends appeared during the study periods. There was a steady increase in all procedures in all groups except for the resurfacings, which decreased 26% in males and 53% in females between 2009 and 2010. Differences were observed in the demographics of patients presenting for resurfacing, compared to those presenting for conventional total hip arthroplasty. In addition to the revenue stream considerations, institutions undertaking a resurfacing program must commit the resources and planning in order to rehabilitate these patients more expeditiously than is usually required with conventional hip arthroplasty patients.