Simultaneous Versus Staged Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Analysis of Revenue and Contribution Margin.

BACKGROUND

Though previous studies have demonstrated improved cost benefits associated with simultaneous versus staged bilateral total hip arthroplasty (simBTHA and staBTHA), further investigation is needed regarding the revenues and contribution margins (CMs) of these procedures. In this study, we compared revenue, CM, and surgical outcomes between simBTHA and staBTHA.

METHODS

All patients who underwent simBTHA (both procedures completed the same day) and staBTHA (procedures completed on different days within one year) between 2011 and 2021 at a single high-volume orthopedic specialty hospital were identified. Of the 1,517 identified patients (n = 139 simBTHA, n = 1,378 staBTHA), 232 were included in a 1:1 propensity match based on baseline demographics (116 per cohort). Revenue, costs, CM, and surgical outcomes were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Compared to staBTHA, simBTHA procedures had significantly lower total costs (P < .001), direct costs (P < .001), and patient revenue. There was no significant difference in CM between groups (P = .361). Additionally, there were no significant differences in length of stay (P = .173), operative time (P = .438), 90-day readmissions (P = .701), 90-day revisions (P = .313), or all-cause revisions (P = .701) between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Though simBTHA procedures have lower revenues than staBTHA, they also have lower costs, resulting in similar CM between procedures. As both procedures have similar postoperative complication rates, further research is required to evaluate specifically which patients may benefit from simBTHA versus staBTHA regarding clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.