Background: Hospitals and providers may increase hand surgery charges to compensate for decreasing reimbursement. Higher charges, combined with increasing utilization of ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), may threaten the accessibility of affordable hand surgery care for uninsured and underinsured patients. Methods: We queried the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary to collect the number of procedures, charges, and reimbursements of hand procedures from 2010 to 2019. We adjusted procedural volume by Medicare enrollment and monetary values to the 2019 US dollar. We calculated weighted means of charges and reimbursement that were then used to calculate reimbursement-to-charge ratios (RCRs). We calculated overall change and r2 from 2010 to 2019 for all procedures and stratified by procedural type, service setting, and state where service was rendered. Results: Weighted mean charges, reimbursement, and RCRs changed by + 21.0% (from $1,227 to $1,485; r2 = 0.93), +10.8% (from $321 to $356; r2 = 0.69), and -8.4% (from 0.26 to 0.24; r2 = 0.76), respectively. The Medicare enrollment-adjusted number of procedures performed in ASCs increased by 63.8% ( r2 = 0.95). Trends in utilization and billing varied widely across different procedural types, service settings, and states. Conclusions: Charges for hand surgery procedures steadily increased, possibly reflecting an attempt to make up for reimbursements perceived to be inadequate. This trend places uninsured and underinsured patients at greater risk for financial catastrophe, as they are often responsible for full or partial charges. In addition, procedures shifted from inpatient to ASC setting. This may further limit access to affordable hand care for uninsured and underinsured patients.
With increasing value being placed on patient-centered care and the focus on efficiency and workflow in health care delivery, the authors have implemented a web-based system for demographic, medical history, and patient-reported outcomes data collection for every clinical visit at their specialty upper-extremity center. They evaluated initial success and disparities in use after 12 months. The authors evaluated questionnaire parameters from 2018 patients, focusing primarily on the new patient intake form. They analyzed form-completion time relative to appointment time and form-completion percentage at various times before the appointment. The authors grouped patients by age, sex, race, income, education, employment status, transportation access, self-reported pain, and quality-of-life scores. Waiting room time was evaluated. Of new patients, 94% used the web-based platform to complete the intake form. Of the 4898 completed forms, 69.7% were done more than 1 hour before appointment time, indicating that a personal device was used. When grouped by patient characteristics and controlling for all demographic factors, patients who were male, non-White, and older than 40 years; had lower family income; and had a high school education or less were significantly associated with later form completion. Of the 1136 patients for whom the authors had adequate waiting room time data, late form completion significantly increased odds of waiting more than 15 minutes to be placed into an examination room. These data indicate that the authors are reliably capturing important patient information before appointment time. This could improve clinical workflow and overall quality of care and also identify limits in access and online system use, providing opportunities to improve capture by developing targeted interventions for specific patient populations. [ Orthopedics . 2021;44(3):e434–e439.]
Introduction: On January 1, 2019, in an effort to improve price transparency, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) mandated that hospitals display chargemasters and pricing for diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) online. We examined the compliance of the 50 top orthopaedic hospitals, ranked by US News, with CMS's mandate and compared pricing. Methods: The chargemaster and pricing of DRG codes related to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) (469, 470, 461, 462, 466, 467, and 468) were evaluated in the top 50 orthopaedic hospitals in the United States. Spearman rank correlation coefficients (r) were used to evaluate the association between DRG 469, 470, and 467 prices with geographic practice cost index (GPCI) work and practice expense values. Results: Thirty-six of the 50 hospitals reported DRG pricing for THA and TKA. Of these hospitals, 15 had prices for all seven DRGs of interest; only 467, 469, and 470 were reported across all the 36 hospitals. Of the 14 hospitals without DRG information, 12 had nothing and two had unsatisfactory reporting. Prices for DRGs 469, 470, and 467 were moderately or weakly correlated with both GPCI work and GPCI practice expense. All correlation analyses were statistically significant (P , 0.05). Discussion: In summary, compliance with CMS's 2019 rule was poor overall. Fourteen of the 50 hospitals did not adequately report any DRG pricing, and only 15 of the hospitals were fully compliant with the mandate. In addition to poor compliance, the reported costs had variation not strongly accounted for by established geographic differences. Healthcare expenditure in the United States continues to rise and is projected to account for 20% of the gross domestic product by 2028. 1 Healthcare pricing is difficult for the average consumer to obtain Kovid Bhayana, BS
steoarthritis of the thumb carpometacarpal, or basilar, joint is nearly universal as people age and can be debilitating or asymptomatic. 1,2 When patients do not adequately respond to nonoperative measures, a variety of surgical procedures are available and are mostly efficacious. No procedure is superior, with no notable differences between them other than perhaps cost and complications. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Still, there is a definite subset of patients, up to at least 15 percent, who are dissatisfied with some aspects of their surgical result regardless of the techniques
Purpose: To identify targets for corrective interventions and guide improved opioid stewardship, we studied opioid prescribing patterns of attending surgeons compared with surgical trainees for 2 upperextremity surgeries: open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRF), and carpal tunnel release (CTR). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records for all patients who underwent CTR or DRF ORIF at 6 hospitals across a large health system from 2016 to 2018. We collected prescriber training level (attending vs trainee), analgesic prescribed, and amount initially prescribed after surgery converted to oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). Regression models evaluated OMEs by prescriber and surgery type. Our final models included an interaction term between prescriber training level and year of surgery to assess group changes over time. No prescription guidelines or formal training was provided during the study period. Results: We included 707 CTR and 383 DRF ORIF patients. Opioids prescribed by trainees ranged from 90 to 300 OMEs (median, 180 OMEs). Opioids prescribed by attendings ranged from 100 to 225 OMEs (median, 150 OMEs). Early in the analyses, trainees prescribed significantly more than attendings (320 versus 180). Over time, trainees reduced overprescribing significantly more, by an additional 40 OME/y. By the end of the analysis period, trainees were prescribing less OME than were attendings (112.5 vs 150). Both groups continued to prescribe more than recently suggested amounts for both procedures. Conclusions: Our study found that both attendings and trainees overprescribed opioids after surgery. Trainees prescribed more than attendings over the study period; however, when analyzing for improvement over time and with no formal intervention or training, trainees showed greater improvement, eventually dropping to levels at or below that of attendings. Considering that most change was seen at the trainee level, education for established providers may be an area in which more improvement can be made. Clinical relevance: Understanding which providers are more likely to overprescribe opioids can help guide interventions that improve opioid stewardship.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.