Financial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on cystic fibrosis care: lessons for the future.

BACKGROUND: Chronic care delivery models faced unprecedented financial pressures, with a reduction of in-person visits and adoption of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand the reported financial impact of pandemic-related changes to the cystic fibrosis (CF) care model. METHODS: The U.S. CF Foundation State of Care surveys fielded in Summer 2020 (SoC1) and Spring 2021 (SoC2) included questions for CF programs on the impact of pandemic-related restrictions on overall finances, staffing, licensure, and reimbursement of telehealth services. Descriptive analyses were conducted based on program type. RESULTS: Among the 286 respondents (128 pediatric, 118 adult, 40 affiliate), the majority (62%) reported a detrimental financial impact to their CF care program in SoC1, though fewer (42%) reported detrimental impacts in SoC2. The most common reported impacts in SoC1 were redeployment of clinical staff (68%), furloughs (52%), hiring freezes (51%), decreases in salaries (34%), or layoffs (10%). Reports of lower reimbursement for telehealth increased from 30% to 40% from SoC1 to SoC2. Projecting towards the future, only a minority (17%) of program directors in SoC2 felt that financial support would remain below pre-pandemic levels. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in financial strain on the CF care model, including challenges with reimbursement for telehealth services and reductions in staffing due to institutional changes. Planning for the future of CF care model needs to address these short-term impacts, particularly to ensure a lack of interruption in high-quality multi-disciplinary care.

Comparative Safety of Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapies During a Government-Sponsored Reimbursement Program.

INTRODUCTION: The British Columbia Ministry of Health launched a Smoking Cessation Program on September 30, 2011, providing financial coverage for smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Although pharmacotherapies have been shown to have a moderate short-term benefit as a quitting aid, substantial cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric safety concerns have been identified in adverse-reporting databases, leading to prescription label warnings by Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. However, recent studies indicate these warnings may be without merit. This study examined the comparative safety of medications commonly used to aid smoking cessation. AIMS AND METHODS: Population-based retrospective cohort study using B.C. administrative data to assess the relative safety between varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included mortality, a composite of neuropsychiatric hospitalizations, and individual components of the primary outcome. Statistical analysis used propensity score-adjusted log-binomial regression models. A sensitivity analysis excluded patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: The study included 116 442 participants. Compared with NRT, varenicline was associated with a 10% 1-year relative risk decrease of cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio [RR] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82 to 1.00), a 20% 1-year relative risk decrease of neuropsychiatric hospitalization (RR: 0.80, CI: 0.7 to 0.89), and a 19% 1-year relative risk decrease of mortality (RR: 0.81, CI: 0.71 to 0.93). We found no significant association between NRT and bupropion for cardiovascular hospitalizations, neuropsychiatric hospitalizations, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NRT, varenicline is associated with fewer serious adverse events and bupropion the same number of serious adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: This study addresses the need for comparative safety evidence in a real-world setting of varenicline and bupropion against an active comparator. Compared with NRT, varenicline was associated with a decreased risk of mortality, serious cardiovascular events, and neuropsychiatric events during the treatment, or shortly after the treatment, in the general population of adults seeking pharmacotherapy to aid smoking cessation. These results provide support for the removal of the varenicline boxed warning for neuropsychiatric events and add substantively to the cardiovascular safety findings of previous observational studies and randomized clinical trials.

A Paradigm Shift in Physician Reimbursement: A Model to Align Reimbursement to Value in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite common beliefs, underuse of laparoscopic colorectal surgery remains an issue. A paradigm shift to increase laparoscopy and align payment with effort is needed, with pressures to improve value. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare reimbursement across surgical approach and payer for common colorectal procedures and to propose a novel way to increase use in the United States. DATA SOURCES: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (Medicare) reimbursement and commercial claims data from 2012 to 2015 were used. STUDY SELECTION: Reimbursement across payers was mapped for the 10 most common colorectal procedures using the open and laparoscopic approaches. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The reimbursement difference across approaches by payer and potential value proposition from a cost-shifting model increasing reimbursement with corresponding increases in laparoscopic use was measured. RESULTS: For Medicare, reimbursement was lower laparoscopically than open for the majority. With commercial, laparoscopy was reimbursed less for 3 procedures. When laparoscopic reimbursement was higher, the amount was not substantial. Medicare payments were consistently lower than commercial, with corresponding lower reimbursement for laparoscopy. Increasing reimbursement by 10%, 20%, and 30% resulted in significant cost savings with laparoscopy. Savings were amplified with increasing use, with additional savings over baseline at all levels, except 30% reimbursement/10% increased use. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the use of claims data, which could have coding errors and confounding in the case mix across approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement for laparoscopic colorectal surgery is comparatively lower than open. Reimbursement can be increased with significant overall cost savings, as the reimbursement/case is still less than total cost savings with laparoscopy compared with open cases. Incentivizing surgeons toward laparoscopy could drive use and improve outcomes, cost, and quality as we shift to value-based payment. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B290. CAMBIOS EN LOS PARADIGMAS DE REEMBOLSOS MÉDICOS: UN MODELO PARA ALINEAR EL REEMBOLSO AL VALOR REAL DE LA CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS: A pesar de las creencias comunes, la subutilización de la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica sigue siendo un problema. Se necesita un cambio en los paradigmas para aumentar y alinear el rembolso de la laparoscopia aplicando mucho esfuerzo para obtener una mejoría en su valor real.Comparar los reembolsos del abordaje quirúrgico y los de la administración para procedimientos colorrectales comunes y proponer una nueva forma de aumentar su uso en los Estados Unidos.Reembolsos en los Centros de Servicios de Medicare y Medicaid (Medicare) y los datos de reclamos comerciales encontrados de 2012-2015.El reembolso administrativo se mapeó para los diez procedimientos colorrectales más comunes utilizando los enfoques abiertos y laparoscópicos.Diferencias de reembolso entre los enfoques por parte de la administración y la propuesta de valor real de un modelo de cambio de costos que aumentan el reembolso con los aumentos correspondientes si se utiliza la laparoscopía.Para Medicare, el reembolso fue menor para una mayoría por vía laparoscópica que abierta. Comercialmente, la laparoscopia se reembolsó menos por 3 procedimientos. Cuando el reembolso laparoscópico fue mayor, la cantidad no fue sustancial. Los pagos de Medicare fueron consistentemente más bajos que los pagos comerciales, con el correspondiente reembolso más bajo por laparoscopia. El aumento del reembolso en un 10%, 20% y 30% resultó en ahorros de costos significativos con la laparoscopía. Los ahorros se amplificaron con el aumento de la utilización, con ahorros adicionales sobre la línea de base en todos los niveles, excepto el 30% de reembolso / 10% de mayor uso.Uso de datos de reclamos, que podrían tener errores de codificación y confusión en la combinación de casos entre enfoques.El reembolso por la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica es comparativamente más bajo que el abordaje abierto. El reembolso se puede aumentar con ahorros significativos en los costos generales, ya que el reembolso / caso es aún menor que el ahorro total en los costos de la laparoscopia en comparación con los casos abiertos. Incentivar a los cirujanos hacia la laparoscopía podría impulsar la utilización y mejorar los resultados, el costo y la calidad a medida que se pasa al pago basado en el valor real. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B290. (Traducción-Dr Xavier Delgadillo).

Trends in Orthopedic Surgery Reimbursement From 2000 to 2015.

Understanding trends in reimbursement for orthopedic surgery is important, especially considering the changing landscape of health care delivery and payment models. Although other studies have examined these trends using a sampling of common orthopedic procedures compared with non-orthopedic specialties, robust examination across all orthopedic specialties is not available in the current literature. This study aimed to critically analyze the trends in reimbursement in the field of orthopedic surgery. Inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement and work relative value units (RVUs) between 2000 and 2016 for more than 200 individual Current Procedural Terminology codes across all major orthopedic subspecialties were analyzed, and inherent value of work RVUs was assessed by dividing reimbursement dollar values by work RVUs annually and tracking the changes. Between 2000 and 2016, reimbursement decreased across all orthopedic subspecialties by an average of 29%, except oncology, which showed a 6% increase. Work RVUs increased by an average of 10%, but the inherent value of work RVUs decreased across all orthopedic subspecialties by an average of 39%. Increased active involvement of orthopedic attending physicians and residents in coding documentation and fee-schedule representation is needed. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(3):187-190.].

Current Knowledge, Barriers to Implementation, and Future Directions in Palliative Care for End-Stage Liver Disease.

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with a high degree of morbidity and mortality as well as symptom burden. Despite this, the rate of consultation with palliative care (PC) providers remains low, and invasive procedures near the end of life are commonplace. Studies show that involvement of PC providers improves patient satisfaction, and evidence from other chronic diseases demonstrates reduced costs of care and potentially increased survival. Better integration of PC is imperative but hindered by patient and provider misconceptions about its role in the care of patients with ESLD, specifically among candidates for liver transplantation. Additionally, reimbursement barriers and lack of provider knowledge may contribute to PC underutilization. In this review, we discuss the benefits of PC in ESLD, the variability of its delivery, and key stakeholders' perceptions about its use. Additionally, we identify barriers to more widespread PC adoption and highlight areas for future research.

Claims Variability in Charges and Payments for Common Open and Endovascular Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness in healthcare is being increasingly scrutinized. Data regarding claims variability for vascular operations are lacking. Herein, we aim to describe variability in charges and payments for aortoiliac (AI) and infrainguinal (II) revascularizations. METHODS: We analyzed 2012-2014 claims data from a statewide claims database for procedures grouped by Current Procedural Terminology codes into II-open (II-O), II-endovascular (II-E), AI-open (AI-O), and AI-endovascular interventions (AI-E). We compared charges and payments in urban (≥50,000 people, UAs) versus rural areas (<50,000 people, RAs). Amounts are reported in $US as median with interquartile range. Cost-to-charge ratios (CCRs) as a measure of reimbursement were calculated as the percentage of the charges covered by the payments. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed to determine significant differences. RESULTS: A total of 5,239 persons had complete claims data. There were 7,239 UA and 6,891 RA claims, and 1,057 AI claims (AI-E = 879, AI-O = 178) and 4,182 II claims (II-E = 3,012, II-0 = 1,170). Median charges were $5,357 for AI [$1,846-$27,107] and $2,955 for II [$1,484-$9,338.5] (P < 0.0001). Median plan payment was $454 for AI [$0-$1,380] and $454 for II [$54-$1,060] (P = 0.67). For AI and II, charges were significantly higher for UA than RA (AI: UA $9,875 [$2,489-$34,427], RA $3,732 [$1,450-$20,595], P < 0.0001; II: UA $3,596 [$1,700-$21,664], RA $2,534 [$1,298-$6,169], P < 0.0001). AI-E charges were higher than AI-O (AI-E $7,960 [$1,699-$32,507], AI-O $4,774 [$2,636-$7,147], P < 0.0001), but AI-O payments were higher (AI-E $424 [$0-$1,270], AI-O $869 [$164-$1,435], P = 0.0067). II-E charges were higher (II-E $2,994 [$1,552-$22,164], II-O $2,873 [$1,108-$5,345], P < 0.0001), but II-O payments were higher (II-E $427 [$50-$907], II-O $596 [$73-$1,299], P < 0.0001). CCRs were highest for II operations and UAs. CONCLUSIONS: Wide variability in claim charges and payments exists for vascular operations. AI procedures had higher charges than II, without any difference in payments. UA charged more than RA for both AI and II operations, but RA had higher payments and CCRs. Endovascular procedures had higher charges, while open procedures had higher payments. Charge differences may be related to endovascular device costs, and further research is necessary to determine the reasons behind consistent claims variability between UA and RA.

Disparity in Medicaid physician payments for vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Medicare reimbursements are standardized nationwide on the basis of resource-dependent inputs of physicians' time, intensity, practice costs, and malpractice costs, whereas Medicaid payments vary and are determined by individual states. Our objectives were to determine Medicaid reimbursement to physicians for common vascular procedures for the seven states in the Northeast that compose the New England Society for Vascular Surgery and to compare Medicaid payments with Medicare. METHODS: Using publicly available data, we obtained Medicaid physician payments in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont for 10 commonly performed vascular surgery procedures. For comparison, Medicare physician payments for these procedures were adjusted for regional differences using Medicare geographic payment cost indices. Descriptive statistics were calculated by state; Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare fees, and one-way analysis of variance was used to compare variance. RESULTS: Medicaid payments varied widely by state. Within individual states (except Vermont), there was no relationship between Medicaid and Medicare payments. Medicaid reimbursement for common vascular procedures ranged from 25% to 91% of Medicare rates and had up to a threefold variation in payment among states for a single procedure. The mean Medicaid payment was 60% of Medicare payment. The greatest state-to-state variance in payment was for open abdominal aortic repair (standard deviation, $227.31); the least was for femoral artery exposure (standard deviation, $31.86). For a Medicaid-based, frequency-weighted analysis of services, New Hampshire exhibited the lowest payments (43% Medicare) and Vermont the highest (80% Medicare). CONCLUSIONS: Among the seven Northeast states considered, with the exception of Vermont, there is no logical relationship between Medicaid and Medicare payments. Because Medicare payments are determined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with consideration of resource-based inputs, we conclude that in six of the seven states, Medicaid payments bear no relationship to resource utilization. With Medicaid expansion, access to vascular procedures may be limited by payments insufficient to meet resource needs.

Society of Gynecologic Oncology Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force report: The Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model (ECAP).

Health care in the United States is in the midst of a significant transformation from a "fee for service" to a "fee for value" based model. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 has only accelerated this transition. Anticipating these reforms, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology developed the Future of Physician Payment Reform Task Force (PPRTF) in 2015 to develop strategies to ensure fair value based reimbursement policies for gynecologic cancer care. The PPRTF elected as a first task to develop an Alternative Payment Model for thesurgical management of low risk endometrial cancer. The history, rationale, and conceptual framework for the development of an Endometrial Cancer Alternative Payment Model are described in this white paper, as well as directions forfuture efforts.

[Assessing the benefits of digital health solutions in the societal reimbursement context]. / Nutzenbewertung von digitalen Gesundheitsprodukten (Digital Health) im gesellschaftlichen Erstattungskontext.

For a number of reasons, achieving reimbursability for digital health products has so far proven difficult. Demonstrating the benefits of the technology is the main hurdle in this context. The generally accepted evaluation processes, especially parallel group comparisons in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for (clinical) benefit assessment, are primarily intended to deal with questions of (added) medical benefit. In contrast to drugs or classical medical devices, users of digital health solutions often profit from gaining autonomy, increased awareness and mindfulness, better transparency in the provision of care, and improved comfort, although there are also digital solutions with an interventional character targeting clinical outcomes (e. g. for indications such as anorexia, depression). Commonly accepted methods for evaluating (clinical) benefits primarily rely on medical outcomes, such as morbidity and mortality, but do not adequately consider additional benefits unique to digital health. The challenge is therefore to develop evaluation designs that respect the particularities of digital health without reducing the validity of the evaluations (especially with respect to safety). There is an increasing need for concepts that include both continuous feedback loops for adapting and improving an application while at the same time generate sufficient evidence for complex benefit assessments. This approach may help improve risk benefit ratio assessments of digital health when it comes to implementing digital innovations in healthcare.

Trends in Physician Reimbursement for Spinal Procedures Since 2010.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To identify trends in spinal procedure reimbursement in our practice since 2010. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In an uncertain healthcare climate with continuous reform, trends in physician reimbursement are unclear. Market forces of supply and demand, legislation imposing penalties for quality measures, local competition, and geographic location have the potential to affect reimbursement. An emphasis on quality-of-care and cost reduction is placed on providers and insurers. In a high-cost area such as spine surgery, it is unknown what the reimbursement trends have been over the last 7 years of major healthcare reforms. METHODS: We collected payments received data for the 20 most commonly billed Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for spinal surgery from January 2010 to December 2016. Payments were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for Medical Care in the Northeastern United States. Insurers were separated into four groups: Medicare, Medicaid, Private Insurance, and Workers Compensation and No Fault (WC/NF). Using a weighted average to adjust for variation in procedures performed, average payments were trended over time. Average payments were trended by insurance group averaged by CPT code. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, average overall payments for spinal claims from 2010 to 2016 increased 13.6%. Average reimbursement declined 1.9% from 2010 to 2013 and rose 16.8% from 2014 to 2016. Average Medicaid payments increased 150.1% since 2010 whereas average Medicare payments rose 4.9%. Average reimbursement from private insurers and WC/NF claims decreased 16.2% and 8.5%, respectively, from 2010 to 2013; increasing 14.2% and 12.5%, respectively, from 2014 to 2016. From 2010 to 2016, reimbursement for private insurance decreased 9.3% and increased 8.2% for WC/NF claims. CONCLUSION: Since 2010, inflation-adjusted reimbursement for spinal procedures increased in our practice. There was a decline from 2010 to 2013. Increases occurred from 2014 to 2016 across all insurers. Medicaid payments more than doubled since 2010. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Adequately Addressing Pediatric Obesity: Challenges Faced by Primary Care Providers.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the challenges primary care providers encounter when providing counseling for pediatric patients identified as obese. METHODS: A survey assessed the current challenges and barriers to the screening and treatment of pediatric obesity for providers in northwest Arkansas who provide care to families. The survey consisted of 15 Likert scale questions and 4 open-ended questions. RESULTS: Time, resources, comfort, and cultural issues were reported by providers as the biggest barriers in screening and the treatment of pediatric obesity. All providers reported lack of time as a barrier to providing the care needed for obese children. Cultural barriers of both the provider and client were identified as factors, which negatively affect the care and treatment of obese children. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care providers continue to experience challenges when addressing pediatric obesity. In this study, a lack of adequate time to address obesity was identified as the most significant current barrier and may likely be tied to physician resources. Although reimbursement for obesity is increasing, the level of reimbursement does not support the time or the resources needed to treat patients. Many providers reported their patients' cultural view of obesity influenced how they counsel their patients. Increasing providers' knowledge concerning differences in how weight is viewed or valued may assist them in the assessment and care of obese pediatric patients. The challenges identified in previous research continue to limit providers when addressing obesity. Although progress has been made regarding knowledge of guidelines, continuing effort is needed to tackle the remaining challenges. This will allow for earlier identification and intervention, resulting in improved outcomes in pediatric obesity.

Evaluating The Role Of Payment Policy In Driving Vertical Integration In The Oncology Market.

The health care industry has experienced massive consolidation over the past decade. Much of the consolidation has been vertical (with hospitals acquiring physician practices) instead of horizontal (with physician practices or hospitals merging with similar entities). We documented the increase in vertical integration in the market for cancer care in the period 2003-15, finding that the rate of hospital or health system ownership of practices doubled from about 30 percent to about 60 percent. The two most commonly cited explanations for this consolidation are a 2005 Medicare Part B payment reform that dramatically reduced reimbursement for chemotherapy drugs, and the expansion of hospital eligibility for the 340B Drug Discount Program under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). To evaluate the evidence for these explanations, we used difference-in-differences methods to assess whether consolidation increased more in areas with greater exposure to each policy than in areas with less exposure. We found little evidence that either policy contributed to vertical integration. Rather, increased consolidation in the market for cancer care may be part of a broader post-ACA trend toward integrated health care systems.

Trends in Medicare Service Volume for Cataract Surgery and the Impact of the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule.

OBJECTIVE: To calculate the associations between Medicare payment and service volume for complex and noncomplex cataract surgeries. DATA SOURCES: The 2005-2009 CMS Part B National Summary Data Files, CMS Part B Carrier Summary Data Files, and the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. STUDY DESIGN: Conducting a retrospective, longitudinal analysis using a fixed-effects model of Medicare Part B carriers representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia from 2005 to 2009, we calculated the Medicare payment-service volume elasticities for noncomplex (CPT 66984) and complex (CPT 66982) cataract surgeries. DATA EXTRACTION: Service volume data were extracted from the CMS Part B National Summary and Carrier Summary Data Files. Payment data were extracted from the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: From 2005 to 2009, the proportion of total cataract services billed as complex increased from 3.2 to 6.7 percent. Every 1 percent decrease in Medicare payment was associated with a nonsignificant change in noncomplex cataract service volume (elasticity = 0.15, 95 percent CI [-0.09, 0.38]) but a statistically significant increase in complex cataract service volume (elasticity = -1.12, 95 percent CI [-1.60, -0.63]). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced Medicare payment was associated with a significant increase in complex cataract service volume but not in noncomplex cataract service volume, resulting in a shift toward performing a greater proportion of complex cataract surgeries from 2005 to 2009.

A Western Perspective on "New NOTES" from POEM to Full-thickness Resection and Beyond.

Most new natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery procedures originated in Asia; therefore, most data come from operators and a health care environment different from those in the West. We provide a Western perspective. We discuss East-West differences; review areas in which the United States is leading the way; and discuss the vagaries of coding and reimbursement. In the United States, reimbursement remains problematic. A Current Procedural Terminology code for peroral endoscopic myotomy is inevitable given the rapidly accumulating overwhelmingly positive outcomes data. However, coordinated efforts may help accelerate the process.

The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative.

The Affordable Care Act enters its fifth year firmly entrenched in our national consciousness. One method that has entered the vernacular for achieving cost savings is accountable care. There are other approaches that are less well known. The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative has the potential to significantly impact neurointerventionalists. We review that initiative here.