• Family of patient who died after orthopedic surgery wins $35M verdict against hospital
  • Orthopedic surgeon wins $20M verdict against Johnson & Johnson
  • Minnesota orthopedic group hit with $111M negligence verdict
  • Orthopedic patient's death highlights potential dangers of prior authorization
  • Spine surgeon's video hits 1 million views on TikTok
  • Spine surgeon killed in Oklahoma hospital shooting
  • Spine surgeon owes $17M to paralyzed patient
  • Providence to pay $22.7M to settle unnecessary spine surgery allegations
  • Spine surgeon gets jail time for abusing patient during hospital visit
  • 'They're on really thin ice': Why 1 insurer has drawn spine surgeons' ire
  • Connecticut hospital to appeal $12.5M verdict to family of patient who died after orthopedic surgery
  • Orthopedic surgeon must face suit in patient's death
  • Spine surgeon 1 of 9 physician billionaires on Forbes' 2022 list
  • 23 spine device companies to watch in 2022
  • 4 spine technologies that promised more than they delivered
  • Orthopedic surgeon salary vs. average household income in each state
  • Orthopedic surgeon's health system exit steeped in controversy
  • Terminated orthopedic surgeon contracts with another New York hospital
  • Orthopedic surgeon convicted of battery at hospital
  • Billionaire spine surgeon buys $23.9M mansion
  • UArizona neurosurgery chair dies after motorcycle collision
  • Texas spine surgeon sued by State Farm over 'unnecessary' procedures
  • The spine tech surgeons say will explode in the next 5 years
  • Could Medtronic's spine business be the next medtech spinoff?
  • Ex-NFL player gets 5 years in prison for $2.9M healthcare fraud scheme
  • 41 'rising stars' in orthopedics
  • Orthopedic surgeon indicted in $10M telemedicine fraud scheme
  • Neurosurgeon's startup hits $1.2B valuation
  • Orthopedic surgeon fined for operating on wrong knee
  • Lawsuits build against Aetna's spine surgery coverage
  • Good news, bad news for orthopedic surgeons: 6 observations
  • Former spine surgeon owes $13M to 2 women over unnecessary procedures
  • Walmart's latest partnership pushes retailer into spine care
  • Texas spine surgeon's $11M verdict being appealed
  • 10 power players in orthopedics
  • Rothman Orthopaedics to become national brand, but no 'aspirations to go beyond US'
  • Sports medicine physician fired amid misconduct allegations involving patients
  • Orthopedic surgeon allegedly exaggerated patient visits to defraud insurers
  • Top orthopedic hospital in every state: US News
  • Orthopedic surgeon asking for misconduct charges to be dropped
  • 8 ethical concerns for total joint replacement gainsharing

    8 ethical concerns for total joint replacement gainsharing

    Laura Dyrda -  

    There are more than 400,000 Medicare beneficiaries who receive total joint replacements every year and costs for these procedures are increasing. Initiatives such as the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement program attempt to control costs through bundled payments on a 90-day episode of care.

    An article published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery examines the ethics of gainsharing in total joint arthroplasty as hospitals and physicians align to improve the quality and lower the cost of total joint replacements.

    "Gainsharing is not a new concept in orthopedic surgery, but its inclusion in CJR is its most impactful implementation. However, there are ethical concerns that arise when instituting a program of incentivized financial partnerships between surgeons and hospitals," according to the article.

     

    The CJR bundled payment program began for hospitals in 67 regions across the United States in April 2016 and included voluntary gainsharing arrangements between hospitals and collaborators, some of which were physicians. Here are a few of the potential ethical issues physicians face in the gainsharing model:

     

    1. Physicians may change decision-making about patient care when financial incentives are involved, whether they do it consciously or unconsciously.

     

    2. Since the device cost is among the most expensive aspects of surgery, the hospital and surgeon attempt to negotiate with device manufacturers on better pricing. If device companies can't meet the desired price point, surgeons may decide to switch devices and use an implant system they're less comfortable with.

     

    3. Physicians could face malpractice liabilities if they use less expensive devices that lead to patient harm.

     

    4. Organizations that implement gainsharing must ensure quality doesn't slip. It's incumbent on the providers to make sure there is clinical equivalency between two resources with different costs and ensure any gainsharing arrangements are compliant with the DOJ and OIG regulations.

     

    5. Providers must weigh whether increased costs upfront could lead to lower costs in post-surgical care and how short-term costs can impact long-term savings in terms of the technology survivorship and clinical complications. A more expensive implant that lasts longer and leads to fewer complications could save on the back end.

     

    6. The patient's role in decision-making can also impact gainsharing arrangements. Current gainsharing models don't take patient preference into account.

     

    7. Gainsharing models incentivize physicians to minimize risk, and those who are at a higher risk for complications or may need additional post-surgical care are in danger of not receiving the care they need.

     

    8. Orthopedic device manufacturers are concerned gainsharing measures could stifle innovation as the companies aren't incentivized to invest in research and development. The gainsharing model may also make it more difficult for small companies and start-ups to break into the market with new technology.

     

    "The important concerns discussed in this review must be addressed by implementation of the proper safeguards, including monitoring by legal oversight bodies such as the OIG and DOJ," concluded the article's authors. "Surgeons must also ensure that clinical decisions made for short-term gain do not have adverse long-term consequences."

     

    Copyright © 2022 Becker's Healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy. Linking and Reprinting Policy.

    Featured Learning Opportunities

    Featured Webinars

    Featured Podcast

    Featured Whitepapers