Comparison of Incremental Costs and Medicare Reimbursement for Simple vs Complex Cataract Surgery Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing.

Importance: Cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgeries across medicine and an integral part of ophthalmologic care. Complex cataract surgery requires more time and resources than simple cataract surgery, yet it remains unclear whether the incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery, compared with simple cataract surgery, offsets the increased costs. Objective: To measure the difference in day-of-surgery costs and net earnings between simple and complex cataract surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is an economic analysis at a single academic institution using time-driven activity-based costing methodology to determine the operative-day costs of simple and complex cataract surgery. Process flow mapping was used to define the operative episode limited to the day of surgery. Simple and complex cataract surgery cases (Current Procedural Terminology codes 66984 and 66982, respectively) at the University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center from 2017 to 2021 were included in the analysis. Time estimates were obtained using an internal anesthesia record system. Financial estimates were obtained using a mix of internal sources and prior literature. Supply costs were obtained from the electronic health record. Main Outcomes and Measures: Difference in day-of-surgery costs and net earnings. Results: A total of 16 092 cataract surgeries were included, 13 904 simple and 2188 complex. Time-based day-of-surgery costs for simple and complex cataract surgery were $1486.24 and $2205.83, respectively, with a mean difference of $719.59 (95% CI, $684.09-$755.09; P < .001). Complex cataract surgery required $158.26 more for costs of supplies and materials (95% CI, $117.00-$199.60; P < .001). The total difference in day-of-surgery costs between complex and simple cataract surgery was $877.85. Incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery was $231.01; therefore, complex cataract surgery had a negative earnings difference of $646.84 compared with simple cataract surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic analysis suggests that the incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery undervalues the resource costs required for the procedure, failing to cover increased costs and accounting for less than 2 minutes of increased operating time. These findings may affect ophthalmologist practice patterns and access to care for certain patients, which may ultimately justify increasing cataract surgery reimbursement.

Assessment of patient follow-up from student-run free eye clinic to county ophthalmology clinic.

The Ophthalmology Student Interest Group at Indiana University School of Medicine provides a free student-run eye screening clinic for an underserved community in Indianapolis. Patients with abnormal findings are referred to the ophthalmology service of the local county hospital for further evaluation. This retrospective chart review studied 180 patients referred from our free eye clinic to follow up at the ophthalmology service of a local county hospital from October 2013 to February 2020. This study investigated factors impacting follow-up of patients by analyzing demographics, medical history, insurance coverage, and final diagnoses at follow-up. Thirty-five (19.4%) of 180 patients successfully followed up at the local county hospital with an average time to follow-up of 14.4 (± 15.9) months. Mean patient age was 51 (± 13.6) with nearly equal numbers of males and females. The most common diagnoses at follow-up included refractive error (51.4%), cataract (45.7%), and glaucoma (28.6%). Patients with diabetes diagnoses or Healthy Indiana Plan insurance coverage had increased probability of follow-up. This study reveals gaps in timely follow-up to the local county hospital, demonstrating the current limitations of our free clinic in connecting patients to more definitive care and the need for an improved referral process.

SUCCESSFUL INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND REDUCE PATIENT VISIT DURATION IN A RETINA PRACTICE.

PURPOSE: To reduce the total clinic visit duration among retina providers in an academic ophthalmology department. METHODS: All patient encounters across all providers in the department were analyzed to determine baseline clinic visit duration time, defined as the elapsed time between appointment time and checkout. To increase photography capacity, a major bottleneck identified through root cause analysis, four interventions were implemented: training ophthalmic technicians to perform fundus photography in addition to optical coherence tomographies, relocating photography equipment to be adjacent to examination rooms, procuring three additional Optos widefield retinal photography units, and shifting staff schedules to better align with that of the providers. These interventions were implemented in the clinics of two retina providers. RESULTS: The average baseline visit duration for all patients across all providers was 87 minutes (19,550 patient visits). The previous average visit duration was 80 minutes for Provider 1 (557 patient visits) and 81 minutes for Provider 2 (1,246 patient visits). In the 4 weeks after interventions were implemented, the average visit duration decreased to 60 minutes for Provider 1 and 57 minutes for Provider 2. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach and a multidisciplinary team resulted in targeted, cost-effective interventions that reduced total visit durations.

Drivers of Medicare Spending: A 15-Year Review of Radiation Oncology Charges Allowed by the Medicare Physician/Supplier Fee-for-Service Program Compared With Other Specialties.

PURPOSE: In 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services proposed a new radiation oncology alternative payment model aimed at reducing expenditures. We examined changes in aggregate physician Medicare charges allowed per specialty to provide contemporary context to proposed changes and hypothesize that radiation oncology charges remained stable through 2017. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Medicare physician/supplier utilization, program payments, and balance billing for original Medicare beneficiaries, by physician specialty, were analyzed from 2002 to 2017. Total allowed charges under the physician/supplier fee-for-service program, inflation-adjusted charges, and percent of total charges billed per specialty were examined. We adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index for medical care from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. RESULTS: Total allowed charges increased from $83 billion in 2002 to $138 billion in 2017. The specialties accounting for the most charges billed to Medicare were internal medicine and ophthalmology. Radiation oncology charges accounted for 1.2%, 1.6%, and 1.4% of total charges allowed by Medicare in 2002, 2012, and 2017, respectively. Radiation oncology charges allowed increased 44% from 2002 to 2012 ($987.6 million to $1.42 billion) but decreased by 19% from 2012 to 2017 ($1.15 billion), adjusted for inflation. Total charges allowed by internal medicine decreased 2% from 2002 to 2012 ($8.53 to $8.36 billion), adjusted for inflation, and decreased 16% from 2012 to 2017 ($7.05 billion). When adjusting for inflation, ophthalmology charges increased 18% from 2002 to 2012 ($4.53 to $5.36 billion) and increased 3% from 2012 to 2017 ($5.5 billion). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology physician charges represent a small fraction of total Medicare expenses and are not a driver for Medicare spending. Aggregate inflation-adjusted charges by radiation oncology have dramatically declined in the past 5 years and represent a stable fraction of total Medicare charges. The need to target radiation oncology with cost-cutting measures may be overstated.

Process Mapping and Activity-Based Costing of the Intravitreal Injection Procedure.

PURPOSE/AIM OF THE STUDY: To quantify the cost of performing an intravitreal injection (IVI) utilizing activity-based costing (ABC), which allocates a cost to each resource involved in a manufacturing process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study was performed at an urban, multi-specialty ophthalmology practice affiliated with an academic institution. Fourteen patients scheduled for an IVI-only visit with a retina ophthalmologist were observed from clinic entry to exit to create a process map of time and resource utilization. Indirect costs were allocated with ABC and direct costs were estimated based on process map observations, internal accounting records, employee interviews, and nationally-reported metrics. The primary outcome measure was the cost of an IVI procedure in United States dollars. Secondary outcomes included operating income (cost subtracted from revenue) of an IVI and patient-centric time utilization for an IVI. RESULTS: The total cost of performing an IVI was $128.28; average direct material, direct labor, and overhead costs were $2.14, $97.88, and $28.26, respectively. Compared to the $104.40 reimbursement set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for Current Procedural Terminology code 67028, this results in a negative operating income of -$23.88 (-22.87%). The median clinic resource-utilizing time to complete an IVI was 32:58 minutes (range [19:24-1:28:37]); the greatest bottleneck was physician-driven electronic health record documentation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an objective and accurate cost estimate of the IVI procedure and illustrates how ABC may be applied in a clinical context. Our findings suggest that IVIs may currently be undervalued by payors.

Health economic evaluation in ophthalmology.

Health economic evaluation is the application of economic theories, tools and concepts to healthcare. In the setting of limited resources, increasing demand and a growing array of intervention options, economic evaluation provides a framework for measuring, valuing and comparing the costs and benefits of different healthcare interventions. This review provides an overview of the concepts and methods of economic evaluation, illustrated with examples in ophthalmology. Types of economic evaluation include cost-minimisation, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and economic modelling. Topics including utility measures, the quality-adjusted lifeyear, discounting, perspective and timeframe are discussed. Health economic evaluation is important to understand the costs and value of interventions in ophthalmology and to inform health policy as well as guide clinical decision-making.

Artificial intelligence for teleophthalmology-based diabetic retinopathy screening in a national programme: an economic analysis modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Deep learning is a novel machine learning technique that has been shown to be as effective as human graders in detecting diabetic retinopathy from fundus photographs. We used a cost-minimisation analysis to evaluate the potential savings of two deep learning approaches as compared with the current human assessment: a semi-automated deep learning model as a triage filter before secondary human assessment; and a fully automated deep learning model without human assessment. METHODS: In this economic analysis modelling study, using 39 006 consecutive patients with diabetes in a national diabetic retinopathy screening programme in Singapore in 2015, we used a decision tree model and TreeAge Pro to compare the actual cost of screening this cohort with human graders against the simulated cost for semi-automated and fully automated screening models. Model parameters included diabetic retinopathy prevalence rates, diabetic retinopathy screening costs under each screening model, cost of medical consultation, and diagnostic performance (ie, sensitivity and specificity). The primary outcome was total cost for each screening model. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were done to gauge the sensitivity of the results to key model assumptions. FINDINGS: From the health system perspective, the semi-automated screening model was the least expensive of the three models, at US$62 per patient per year. The fully automated model was $66 per patient per year, and the human assessment model was $77 per patient per year. The savings to the Singapore health system associated with switching to the semi-automated model are estimated to be $489 000, which is roughly 20% of the current annual screening cost. By 2050, Singapore is projected to have 1 million people with diabetes; at this time, the estimated annual savings would be $15 million. INTERPRETATION: This study provides a strong economic rationale for using deep learning systems as an assistive tool to screen for diabetic retinopathy. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Singapore.

The Importance of Telemedicine during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Focus on Diabetic Retinopathy.

Recently, telemedicine has become remarkably important, due to increased deployment and development of digital technologies. National and international guidelines should consider its inclusion in their updates. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mandatory social distancing and the lack of effective treatments has made telemedicine the safest interactive system between patients, both infected and uninfected, and clinicians. A few potential evidence-based scenarios for the application of telemedicine have been hypothesized. In particular, its use in diabetes and complication monitoring has been remarkably increasing, due to the high risk of poor prognosis. New evidence and technological improvements in telemedicine application in diabetic retinopathy (DR) have demonstrated efficacy and usefulness in screening. Moreover, despite an initial increase for devices and training costs, teleophthalmology demonstrated a good cost-to-efficacy ratio; however, no national screening program has yet focused on DR prevention and diagnosis. Lack of data during the COVID-19 pandemic strongly limits the possibility of tracing the real management of the disease, which is only conceivable from past evidence in normal conditions. The pandemic further stressed the importance of remote monitoring. However, the deployment of device and digital application used to increase screening of individuals and monitor progression of retinal disease needs to be easily accessible to general practitioners.

Differences in characteristics of Medicare patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists.

PURPOSE: To quantify differences in the age, gender, race, and clinical complexity of Medicare beneficiaries treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists in each of the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on publicly accessible Medicare payment and utilization data from 2012 through 2017. METHODS: For each ophthalmic and optometric provider, demographic information of treated Medicare beneficiaries was obtained from the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the years 2012 through 2017. Clinical complexity was defined using CMS Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) coding. RESULTS: From 2012 through 2017, ophthalmologists in every state treated statistically significantly older beneficiaries, with the greatest difference (4.99 years in 2014) between provider groups seen in Rhode Island. In most states there was no gender difference among patients treated by the providers but in 46 states ophthalmologists saw a more racially diverse group of beneficiaries. HCC risk score analysis demonstrated that ophthalmologists in all 50 states saw more medically complex beneficiaries and the differences were statistically significant in 47 states throughout all six years. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are regional variations in the characteristics of patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists, ophthalmologists throughout the United States manage older, more racially diverse, and more medically complex Medicare beneficiaries.

Artificial intelligence for diabetic retinopathy screening, prediction and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetic retinopathy is the most common specific complication of diabetes mellitus. Traditional care for patients with diabetes and diabetic retinopathy is fragmented, uncoordinated and delivered in a piecemeal nature, often in the most expensive and high-resource tertiary settings. Transformative new models incorporating digital technology are needed to address these gaps in clinical care. RECENT FINDINGS: Artificial intelligence and telehealth may improve access, financial sustainability and coverage of diabetic retinopathy screening programs. They enable risk stratifying patients based on individual risk of vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema (DME), and predicting which patients with DME best respond to antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy. SUMMARY: Progress in artificial intelligence and tele-ophthalmology for diabetic retinopathy screening, including artificial intelligence applications in 'real-world settings' and cost-effectiveness studies are summarized. Furthermore, the initial research on the use of artificial intelligence models for diabetic retinopathy risk stratification and management of DME are outlined along with potential future directions. Finally, the need for artificial intelligence adoption within ophthalmology in response to coronavirus disease 2019 is discussed. Digital health solutions such as artificial intelligence and telehealth can facilitate the integration of community, primary and specialist eye care services, optimize the flow of patients within healthcare networks, and improve the efficiency of diabetic retinopathy management.

Cost Analysis of Teleophthalmology Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy Using Teleophthalmology Billing Codes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the financial sustainability of teleophthalmology screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR) using telehealth billing codes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The authors performed an Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective review of medical records, billing data, and quality metrics at the University of California Davis Health System from patients screened for DR through an internal medicine-based telemedicine program using CPT codes 92227 or 92228. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients received teleophthalmology screening over a 12-month period, resulting in an increase in the DR screening rate from 49% to 63% (P < .0001). The average payment per patient was $19.86, with an estimated cost of $41.02 per patient. The projected per-patient incentive bonus was $43.06 with a downstream referral revenue of $39.38 per patient. One hundred seventy-eight clinic visits were eliminated, providing an estimated cost savings of $42.53 per patient. CONCLUSION: Sustainable teleophthalmology screening may be achieved by billing telehealth codes but only with health care incentive bonuses, patient referrals, and by accounting for the projected cost-savings of eliminating office visits. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51:S26-S34.].

Demographic and Socioeconomic Differences in Outpatient Ophthalmology Utilization in the United States.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to assess differences in outpatient ophthalmologic usage based on patient characteristics such as race/ethnicity, income, insurance type, geographical region, and educational attainment. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) is a nationally representative data set for the noninstitutionalized population cosponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research. This study involved 183,054 MEPS respondents from 2007 to 2015. Primary outcome measure was patient utilization of outpatient ophthalmologic care. Secondary outcome measure was annual health care use and costs by patients in outpatient, inpatient, and the emergency department settings based on race. RESULTS: Overall, 21,673 participants self-reported an ophthalmologic condition, and 12,462 had at least 1 outpatient ophthalmologic visit. Hispanic (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.72; P < .001) and black patients (aOR 0.74; P < .001) had fewer outpatient visits than their non-Hispanic white counterparts. Uninsured (aOR 0.41; P = .009) and Medicare/Medicaid (aOR 0.92; P < .001) patients had less outpatient care than their privately insured counterparts. Increasing income and education was associated with higher outpatient ophthalmologic care utilization. In the emergency department, non-Hispanic white patients had the least encounters (1.1 per 100 patients) and highest costs ($25,314.05) when compared to non-Hispanic black patients (3.2 encounters per 100 patients and $10,780.22 respectively) and Hispanic patients (2.2 encounters per 100 patients and $9,837.03 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study's findings demonstrate differences in outpatient ophthalmologic utilization based on demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Concurrently, minority Americans had more ophthalmic emergency department visits but lower cost per visit. There is a need to further characterize these differences to predict future ophthalmologic care needs.

Pupil expansion device use and operative outcomes with topical dilation vs intracameral epinephrine in resident-performed cataract surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the use of topical dilation drops vs topical drops with the addition of intracameral epinephrine in resident-performed cataract surgery and the effects on pupil expansion device (PED) use, surgical costs, and surgical times. SETTING: Iowa City Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: Resident-performed primary cataract surgical cases using topical dilation drops only or drops with the addition of intracameral epinephrine were analyzed for PED use, surgical time, and costs in all patients and in patients with a history of tamsulosin use. RESULTS: In the topical group, PEDs were used in 31.1% of cases compared with 13.5% of cases in the intracameral group (P < .0001). History of tamsulosin use was noted in about one third of cases in both groups. For patients with a history of tamsulosin use, PED use decreased from 52.7% in the topical cases to 17.9% in the intracameral group (P < .0001). Surgical times were on average 7.1 minutes slower with PED use than without PED use. There was a medication savings of $50.44 USD per case in the intracameral group compared with the topical group. Factoring in the $100 to $130 USD per PED used, total surgical costs were $19 267 USD less in the intracameral group over 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Intracameral epinephrine with lidocaine decreases the need for PED use during cataract surgery, lowers intraoperative costs, and improves efficiency compared with topical dilation drops alone.

Economic Evaluation of a Telemedicine Service to expand Primary Health Care in Rio Grande do Sul: TeleOftalmo's microcosting analysis. / Avaliação Econômica de um Serviço de Telemedicina para ampliação da Atenção Primária à Saúde no Rio Grande do Sul: o microcusteio do Projeto TeleOftalmo.

This study evaluated the cost of public telediagnostic service in ophthalmology. The time-driven activity-based costing method (TDABC) was adopted to examine the cost components related to teleophthalmology. This method allowed us to establish the standard unit cost of telediagnosis, given the installed capacity and utilization of professionals. We considered data from one year of telediagnoses and evaluated the cost per telediagnosis change throughout technology adaptation in the system. The standard cost calculated by distance ophthalmic diagnosis was approximately R$ 119, considering the issuance of 1,080 monthly ophthalmic telediagnostic reports. We identified an imbalance between activities, which suggests the TDABC method's ability to guide management actions and improve resource allocation. The actual unit cost fell from R$ 783 to R$ 283 over one year - with room to approach the estimated standard cost. Partial economic evaluations contribute significantly to support the incorporation of new technologies. The TDABC method deserves prominence, as it enables us to retrieve more accurate information on the cost of technology, improving the scalability and management capacity of the healthcare system.

Este estudo avaliou o custo de um serviço público de telediagnóstico em oftalmologia. O método de custeio baseado em atividades e tempo (TDABC) foi adotado para examinar os componentes de custos relacionados à teleoftalmologia. Com este método, também foi possível estabelecer o custo unitário padrão que o telediagnóstico deveria ter, dada a capacidade instalada e utilização de profissionais. Dados de um ano de telediagnósticos foram considerados, e avaliou-se a mudança do custo por telediagnóstico ao longo do período de adaptação da tecnologia no sistema. O custo padrão calculado por diagnóstico oftalmológico a distância foi de R$ 119, considerando a emissão de 1.080 laudos de telediagnóstico oftalmológico por mês. Foi identificado um desequilíbrio entre as atividades que sugere a capacidade do método TDABC orientar ações de gestão e melhoria na alocação dos recursos. Ao longo de um ano, o custo unitário real passou de R$ 783 para R$ 283, ainda havendo espaço para se aproximar do custo padrão estimado. Avaliações econômicas parciais possuem importante aporte para subsidiar a incorporação de novas tecnologias. O TDABC merece destaque nesse sentido, pois permite obter informações mais precisas sobre custo da tecnologia, melhorando a capacidade de dimensionamento e gerenciamento da organização de saúde.