Background: Dual eligible Medicare/Medicaid patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) have worse outcomes compared to other insurance payors. Prior literature fails to control for the heterogeneity of care provided amongst a large cohort of hospitals and surgeons as well as differences in patient populations treated. This study compares dual eligible THA patients and Medicaid and Medicare only THA patients at a single high volume tertiary center.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent THA for aseptic osteoarthritis of the hip over a three-year period with either Medicaid or Medicare insurance. 3,329 THA patients were included, of which 439 were Medicaid payor, 182 were dual eligible, and 2,708 were Medicare payor. Groups were compared using appropriate tests for direct comparisons and regression analysis.
Results: Dual eligible patients were less likely to be white and married, and were more likely to be current smokers and have COPD, liver disease, renal disease, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) compared to Medicare patients. These patients also had a lower age-adjusted Charleson Comorbidity Index when compared to Medicare patients (2.4 vs 3.4, P < .001). When controlling for smoking status, age, BMI and major medical comorbidities, dual eligible and Medicaid patients had increased length of stay (LOS) (0.58, 0.66 days, P < .001), higher risk of discharge to subacute rehabilitation (RR 1.97, 3.19, P < .001), and dual eligible patients more often returned to the ED within 90 days (RR 2.74, P < .001) compared to Medicare patients.
Conclusion: This study supports the implementation of socioeconomic risk stratification efforts to properly evaluate value-based healthcare metrics in total hip arthroplasty patients.
Keywords: access to care; arthroplasty; bundled payments; hip replacement; insurance; socioeconomic status.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.