This study shows that a practice-based telemedicine system can produce meaningful improvement in markers of telestroke efficiency in the face of rapid growth of a telestroke network.
Objective To evaluate the role and growth of independently billing otolaryngology (ORL) advanced practice providers (APPs) within a Medicare population. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Data Files, 2012-2017. Methods This retrospective review included data and analysis of independent Medicare-billing ORL APPs. Total sums and medians were gathered for Medicare reimbursements, services performed, number of patients, and unique Current Procedural Terminology ( CPT) codes used, along with geographic and sex distributions. Results There has been near-linear growth in number of ORL APPs (13.7% to 18.4% growth per year), with a 115.4% growth from 2012 to 2017. Similarly, total Medicare-allowed reimbursement (2012: $15,568,850; 2017: $35,548,446.8), total number of services performed (2012: 313,676; 2017: 693,693.7), and total number of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients (2012: 108,667; 2017: 238,506) increased. Medians of per APP number of unique CPT codes used, Medicare-allowed reimbursement, number of services performed, and number of Medicare FFS patients have remained constant. There were consistently more female APPs than male APPs (female APP proportion range: 71.3%-76.7%). Compared to ORL physicians, there was a significantly greater proportion of APPs practicing in a rural setting as opposed to urban settings (2017: APP proportion 13.6% vs ORL proportion 8.4%; P < .001). Conclusion Although their scope of practice has remained constant, independently billing ORL APPs are rapidly increasing in number, which has led to increased Medicare reimbursements, services, and patients. ORL APPs tend to be female and are used more heavily in regions with fewer ORL physicians.
Background Studies have suggested that physicians are steadily being paid less per Medicare service over time based on inflation‐adjusted dollars. The objective of this study was to determine whether this phenomenon was true for rhinologic procedures. Methods This study was a retrospective analysis of the 2000‐2021 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Fee Schedule investigating fees for in‐office endoscopies (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] codes 31231‐31238), in‐office balloon ostial dilation (CPTs 31295‐31298), in‐facility low‐relative value unit (RVU) surgeries (<10 work RVUs [wRVUs]; CPTs 31239‐31288 and 61782), and in‐facility high‐RVU surgeries (>10 wRVUs; CPTs 31290‐31294). Total number of and reimbursements for these services was obtained from yearly National Part B Summary Datafiles. Results Between 2000 and 2021, adjusted reimbursements for low‐ and high‐wRVU rhinologic surgeries decreased by 50.0% and 36.1%, respectively. The average compound annual growth rate (CAGR) decrease was 3.3% and 2.1%, respectively. Excluding a 48.3% unadjusted reimbursement increase between 2000 and 2004, endoscopies saw an adjusted reimbursement decrease of 29.4% from 2004 onward, an average CAGR of −2.1%. From 2011 onward, balloon ostial dilations saw a decrease in adjusted reimbursement of 43.8%, an average CAGR of −6.0%. Nevertheless, after inflation adjustment, National Part B data reveal that Medicare paid more, in total, for these procedures in 2019 than in 2000 due to increasing utilization. Conclusion Medicare reimbursements are complex, adjusted yearly, and undergo constant federal scrutiny due to the increasing costs of health care. These results suggest that, in terms of real dollars, rhinologic procedures have seen a large gradual decrease in Medicare reimbursement, which is important information for policymakers and surgeons alike.
Objective Corticosteroid-eluting stents (CESs) are increasingly used after endoscopic sinus surgery to reduce the need for revision surgery, but their use is not without risks. The objective of this study is to describe adverse events related to CESs. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting The US Food and Drug Administration’s MAUDE database (2011-2020; Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience). Methods The MAUDE database was queried for reports of adverse events involving the use of CESs approved by the Food and Drug Administration, including Propel, Propel Mini, Propel Contour, and Sinuva (Intersect ENT). Results There were 28 reported adverse events in total, with all events being related to the Propel family of stents and none related to Sinuva stents. Overall, 22 were categorized as patient-related adverse events and 6 as device-related events. The most common adverse event was related to postoperative infection, accounting for 39% (n = 11) of all complications. Four of these patients developed periorbital cellulitis, and 5 developed a fungal infection. The second-most common adverse event was migration of the stent, representing 21% of all complications (n = 6). Overall, 8 patients (29%) in our cohort required reintervention in the operating room, with subsequent removal of the CES. Conclusion The most commonly reported adverse events were postoperative infection, including multiple cases of fungal infection, followed by migration of the stent. An increased awareness of the complications associated with CESs can be used to better inform patients during the consenting process as well as surgeons in their surgical decision making.
Purpose To analyze the utility of a 5-item odorant test ( U-Smell-It ™) in determining COVID-19 status in COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive and -negative participants. Methods Symptoms, COVID-19 status, and 5-item odorant test results were collected from general population COVID-19 testing in Louisiana ( n = 1042), and routine COVID-19 screening of healthcare workers in a nursing home in Florida ( n = 278) ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04431908 ). Results In the general population COVID-19 testing site, a cutoff point of ≤2 (0, 1, or 2 correct answers out of 5) achieved sensitivity of 40.0% (95% CI: 26.4%–54.8%) and specificity of 89.2% (95% CI: 87.1%–91.1%) in detecting COVID-19 infection. Within this population, analysis of individuals with no self-reported loss of smell/taste and runny/stuffy nose resulted in sensitivity of 38.1% (95% CI: 18.1%–61.6%) and specificity of 92.3% (95% CI: 89.1%–93.4%), while analysis of individuals with self-reported loss of smell/taste and/or runny/stuffy nose resulted in sensitivity of 41.4% (95% CI: 23.5%–61.1%) and specificity of 82.4% (95% CI: 77.7%–86.5%). Conclusions The quick turnaround time, low cost, reduced resource requirement, and ease of administering odorant tests provide many advantages as an indicator sign to help flag a molecular diagnostic COVID-19 test with relatively high specificity. Our results suggest that this odorant testing for olfactory dysfunction may be a viable option in pre-screening COVID-19 infection. This tool has the potential to allow for continued monitoring and surveillance, while helping mitigate surges of COVID-19 variants. Further investigation is warranted to observe the extent to which odorant testing might be applied in a serial testing scenario.
AimsAdoption of virtual clinics has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and they will continue to form an integral part of healthcare delivery. Our objective was to evaluate virtual clinics in orthopaedic practice and determine how to use them effectively and sustainably.MethodsWe surveyed 100 consecutive patients participating in orthopaedic virtual phone clinic (VPC) at an academic hospital to evaluate patient satisfaction against face-to-face (F2F) consultations and obtain suggestions for improving patient experience, and we surveyed 23 clinicians who conducted orthopaedic VPCs in 2020. Data were correlated with clinic outcomes, reason for consultation, diagnosis, patient age and clinician grade. Consultation duration, clinician-associated costs and reimbursement were analysed. Significance was tested using two-tailed Student’s t-test and Fisher’s exact test.ResultsPatient satisfaction (out of 5) for VPC was significantly lower than F2F (4.1 vs 4.5, p=0.0003), and a larger proportion of VPC scored <3 compared with F2F (11% vs 2%). Higher VPC scores were associated with appointments for delivering results and where patients felt clinical examination was not needed. Patients suggested introducing video capability, adhering to appointment time and offering the choice of VPC or F2F. Mean clinician satisfaction scores for VPC were 4.3/5 and suggested indications for VPC included: routine surveillance, communication of results, discussing/consenting for surgery and vulnerable patients. Integrating video, providing private rooms and offering patients time intervals for VPC were recommended. Current National Health Service VPC structures uses greater clinician resources and generates lower reimbursement than F2F consultations, resulting in 11.5% reduction in reimbursement.ConclusionVPC plays a valuable role when clinical evaluation has been performed or considered not necessary. Offering the choice of VPC or F2F, adding video capability and providing a time interval for VPC may reduce resource use and increase satisfaction. We recommend renegotiating VPC tariffs and cost-neutral modifications of clinic structure.
Objective To compare billing practices, reimbursement rates, and patient populations of otolaryngology (ORL) physicians practicing in rural and urban settings. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Data. Methods Medicare-allowed payments, number of services, and number of patients were gathered along with patient population comorbidity statistics, including average hierarchical condition category risk scores. Results In 2019, 92% of the overall total 8959 ORL physicians practiced in an urban setting. These 8243 urban ORL physicians, on average, billed for 51 (interquartile range [IQR], 31-67) unique Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes, cared for 393 (IQR, 172-535) Medicare patients, performed 1761 (IQR, 502-2070) services, and collected $139,957 (IQR, $55,527-$178,479) per provider. In contrast, the 704 rural ORL physicians, on average, billed for a greater number of unique HCPCS codes (59; IQR, 37-77; P < .001), treated more Medicare patients (445; IQR, 242-614; P < .001), and performed more services (2330; IQR, 694-2748; P < .001) but collected about the same per provider ($141,035; IQR, $56,555-$172,864; P = .426). Older age was associated with rural practice ( P = .027). Among both urban and rural ORL physicians, the variety and complexity of procedures and patient comorbidity profiles were comparable. Conclusion Most ORL physicians practice in large urban settings, a finding potentially related to financial sustainability and career opportunity. With an already small workforce, the aging rural ORL physician population is an identifiable weak point in the otolaryngology specialty that must be addressed with geo-specific recruitment campaigns, rural work incentivization, and the development of career advancement opportunities in rural areas.
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.