A Cross-Sectional Analysis of High-Acuity Professional Services Performed by Urban and Rural Emergency Care Physicians Across the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to examine differences in the provision of high-acuity professional services between rural and urban physicians receiving reimbursement for emergency care evaluation and management services from Medicare fee-for-service Part B. METHODS: Using the 2017 Medicare Public Use Files, we performed a cross-sectional analysis and defined the primary outcome, the proportion of high-acuity charts (PHAC), at the physician level as the proportion of services provided as 99285 and 99291 emergency care evaluation and management service codes relative to all such codes. After accounting for unique clinician-level characteristics, we categorized individual physicians by PHAC quintiles and conducted ordered logistic regression analyses reporting adjusted marginal probabilities to examine associations with rurality. RESULTS: A total of 34,256 physicians providing emergency care had a median PHAC of 66.8% (interquartile range 55.6% to 75.7%), with 89.2% practicing in an urban setting. Urban and rural physicians had respective median PHACs of 67.6% (interquartile range 57.1% to 76.2%) and 57.9% (interquartile range 42.7% to 69.4%). Urban and rural physicians had respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 15.2% and 11.8% of being in the highest PHAC quintile, and respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 14.3% and 18.2% of being in the lowest PHAC quintile. CONCLUSION: In comparison with rural physicians, urban physicians providing emergency care received reimbursements for a greater PHAC when caring for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Policymakers must consider these differences in the design and implementation of new emergency care payment policies.

A Qualitative Study of Risks Related to Interhospital Transfer of Patients with Nontraumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage.

GOAL: Interhospital transfer (IHT) facilitates access to specialized neurocritical care but may also introduce unique risk. Our goal was to describe providers' perceptions of safety threats during IHT for patients with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We employed qualitative, semi-structured interviews at an academic medical center receiving critically-ill neurologic transfers, and 5 referring hospitals. Interviewees included physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals with experience caring for patients transferred between hospitals for nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage. Interviews continued until data saturation was reached. Coding occurred concurrently with interviews. Analysis was inductive, using the constant comparative method. FINDINGS: The predominant impediments to safe, high-quality neurocritical care transitions between hospitals are insufficient communication, gaps in clinical practice, and lack of IHT structure. Insufficient communication highlights the unique communication challenges specific to IHT, which overlay and compound known intrahospital communication barriers. Gaps in clinical practice revolve primarily around the provision of neurocritical care for this patient population, often subject to resource availability, by receiving hospital emergency medicine providers. Lack of structure outlines providers' questions that emerge when institutions fail to identify process channels, expectations, and accountability during complex neurocritical care transitions. CONCLUSIONS: The predominant impediments to safe, high-quality neurocritical care transitions between hospitals are insufficient communication, gaps in clinical practice, and lack of IHT structure. These themes serve as fundamental targets for quality improvement initiatives. To our knowledge, this is the first description of challenges to quality and safety in high-risk neurocritical care transitions through clinicians' voices.