Patient and Caregiver Considerations and Priorities When Selecting Hospitals for Complex Cancer Care.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare policies have focused on centralizing care to high-volume centers in an effort to optimize patient outcomes; however, little is known about patients' and caregivers' considerations and selection process when selecting hospitals for care. We aim to explore how patients and caregivers select hospitals for complex cancer care and to develop a taxonomy for their selection considerations. METHODS: This was a qualitative study in which data were gathered from in-depth interviews conducted from March to November 2019 among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancers who were scheduled to undergo a pancreatectomy (n = 20) at a metropolitan, urban regional, or suburban medical center and their caregivers (n = 10). RESULTS: The interviews revealed six broad domains that characterized hospital selection considerations: hospital factors, team characteristics, travel distance to hospital, referral or recommendation, continuity of care, and insurance considerations. The identified domains were similar between participants seen at the metropolitan center and urban/suburban medical centers, with the following exceptions: participants receiving care specifically at the metropolitan center noted operative volume and access to specific services such as clinical trials in their hospital selection; participants receiving care at urban/suburban centers noted health insurance considerations and having access to existing medical records in their hospital selection. CONCLUSIONS: This study delineates the many considerations of patients and caregivers when selecting hospitals for complex cancer care. These identified domains should be incorporated into the development and implementation of centralization policies to help increase patient access to high-quality cancer care that is consistent with their priorities and needs.

Coding and reimbursement for weight loss surgery: best practice recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To review the use and usefulness of billing codes for services related to weight loss surgery (WLS) and to examine third party reimbursement policies for these services. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The Task Group carried out a systematic search of MEDLINE, the Internet, and the trade press for publications on WLS, coding, reimbursement, and coding and reimbursement policy. Twenty-eight articles were each reviewed and graded using a system based on established evidence-based models. The Massachusetts Dietetics Association provided reimbursement data for nutrition services. Three suppliers of laparoscopic WLS equipment provided summaries of coding and reimbursement information. WLS program directors were surveyed for information on use of procedure codes related to WLS. RESULTS: Recommendations focused on correcting or improving on the current lack of congruity among coding practices, reimbursement policies, and accepted clinical practice; lack of uniform coding and reimbursement data across institutions; inconsistent and/or inaccurate diagnostic and billing codes; inconsistent insurance reimbursement criteria; and inability to leverage reimbursement and coding data to track outcomes, identify best practices, and perform accurate risk-benefit analyses. DISCUSSION: Rapid changes in the prevalence of obesity, our understanding of its clinical impact, and the technologies for surgical treatment have yet to be adequately reflected in coding, coverage, and reimbursement policies. Issues identified as key to effective change include improved characterization of the risks, benefits, and costs of WLS; anticipation and monitoring of technological advances; encouragement of consistent patterns of insurance coverage; and promotion of billing codes for WLS procedures that facilitate accurate tracking of clinical use and outcomes.