Ankle fractures: What role does level of insurance play in recovery and outcomes?. (January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bakhsh, Wajeeh; Childs, Sean; Judd, Kyle; Soles, Gillian; Humphrey, Catherine; Gorczyca, John; Ketz, John
• Is Part Of: Trauma. Volume 22:Number 1(2020:Jan.)
• Page Start: 32
• Page End: 39
• Publication Date: 2020-01
• Subjects: Orthopedics -- trauma -- ankle fracture -- insurance -- PROMIS; Traumatology -- Periodicals; Disaster medicine -- Periodicals; Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1177/1460408618809018
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1460-4086

Abstract

Introduction: A number of factors including socioeconomic status have been correlated with post-operative outcomes in orthopedic trauma. The objective of this study is to compare post-operative courses and patient-reported outcomes following operatively managed ankle fractures taking into account a patient's level of insurance coverage. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single level I trauma center. Patients were identified by billing code for operative intervention of ankle fractures (OTA 44) from January 2014 to January 2015. Study outcomes included narcotic refills, compliance with follow-up visits, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) survey data, and perioperative complication rates. Statistical analysis included mean comparison between insurance groups and multivariate regression modeling. Results: From January 2014 to January 2015, 209 patients met the inclusion criteria (45 patients under/uninsured vs. 164 fully insured). No differences were found amongst demographic data or fracture characteristics. The underinsured group had a higher average number of narcotic prescriptions (2.6 refills vs. 1.5 refills, p < 0.05). The underinsured group also demonstrated a significantly greater number of missed post-operative clinic visits (0.8 vs. 0.3 visits p < 0.05); the total number of post-operative visits were similar (6.4 vs. 6.9, p = 0.38). At one-year follow-up, the underinsured group had higher pain scores (VAS 3.8 vs. 2.1, p < 0.05), and significantly worse PROMIS scores with respect to mood (54 vs. 49.1, p < 0.05), pain (59.6 vs. 55.5, p < 0.05), and functional outcomes (38 vs. 44.7, p < 0.05). There was no difference in perioperative complication rates. Multivariate regression modeling found insurance (p < 0.05), age (p < 0.05), and smoking (p < 0.05) to be significant determinants of post-operative outcomes. Conclusion: Despite similar demographic and fracture characteristics, patients with decreased insurance coverage demonstrated higher narcotic requirements and missed more appointments. They had worse subjective and objective outcomes. As physician reimbursement becomes increasingly dependent on outcomes, further understanding of the psychosocial factors of this subset of patients is needed to establish realistic expectations and identify avenues for further intervention.