2023
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
The objective of this study was to determine if physicians are compensated equally for the treatment of femoral neck fractures based on fixation method in a propensity score matched cohort of patients. The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS NSQIP) database was queried for patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), hemiarthroplasty (HA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) for femoral neck fractures. Exact matching was used to account for differences in patient-specific variables and underlying medical comorbidities. Total relative value units (RVU), operative time, RVU/minute, and reimbursement/minute were compared between the three procedures after exact matching to assess relative valuation. Propensity score matching resulted in a total of 4,581 patients eligible for final data analysis (1,527 patients in each treatment group). The groups were very well matched for age, sex, BMI, comorbidities, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class (p > 0.99 for all). When dividing compensation by case duration, ORIF generated the most RVUs per minute (0.31 ± 0.19 or $11.01 ± 7.02) followed by THA (0.27 ± 0.14 or $9.86 ± 5.15) and HA (0.25 ± 0.1 or $8.99 ± 3.75; p<0.001 for all). This study shows that orthopaedic surgeons are compensated the most for ORIF followed by THA and HA for fixation of femoral neck fractures. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(3):164-168, 2023).
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- 2023 Does Surgeon Compensation Differ by Implant Choice for the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fractures? 164
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2023
- Éditeur
- Data Trace Publishing Company
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.