Equal pay for equal work: Disparities in compensation in vascular surgery.

Physician compensation varies by specialty, gender, race, years in practice, type of practice, location, and individual productivity. We reviewed the disparities in compensation regarding the variation between medical and surgical specialties, between academic and private practice, between gender, race, and rank, and by practice location. The physician personal debt perspective was also considered to quantify the effect of disparities in compensation. Strategies toward eliminating the pay gap include salary transparency, pay equity audit, paid parental leave, mentoring, sponsorship, leadership, and promotion pathways. Pay parity is important because paying women less than men contributes to the gender pay gap, lowers pension contributions, and results in higher relative poverty in retirement. Pay parity will also affect motivation and relationships at work, ultimately contributing to a diverse workforce and business success. Rewarding all employees fairly is the right thing to do. As surgeons and leaders in medicine, establishing pay equity is a matter of ethical principle and integrity to further elevate our profession.

The initial experience and response of vascular surgeons in Michigan during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The unprecedented pandemic spread of the novel coronavirus has severely impacted the delivery of healthcare services in the United States and around the world, and has exposed a variety of inefficiencies in healthcare infrastructure. Some states have been disproportionately affected such as New York and Michigan. In fact, Detroit and its surrounding areas have been named as the initial Midwest epicenter where over 106,000 cases have been confirmed in April 2020. METHOD, RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Facilities in Southeast Michigan have served as the frontline of the pandemic in the Midwest and in order to cope with the surge, rapid, and in some cases, complete restructuring of care was mandatory to effect change and attempt to deal with the emerging crisis. We describe the initial experience and response of 4 large vascular surgery health systems in Michigan to COVID-19.

Effect of endovenous ablation assessment stratified by great saphenous vein size, gender, clinical severity, and patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The policies of insurance carriers have used the truncal vein size as a criterion for coverage. The objective of the present study was to compare the effect of great saphenous vein (GSV) size ≥5 mm vs <5 mm on patient presentation and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients in a national cohort were prospectively captured in the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry. From January 2015 to October 2017, the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry database was queried for all patients who had undergone varicose vein procedures. The CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic) classification, Venous Clinical Severity Score, and patient-reported outcomes were compared by GSV size (<5 mm, group 1; ≥5 mm, group 2) before and after the procedures. A 2-sample Wilcoxon test was performed to assess the differences between the 2 groups stratified by GSV size. To assess for postoperative improvement, a matched-pairs Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed for each group separately. RESULTS: During the study period, 5757 vein ablation procedures had been performed for GSV: 770 for GSV size <5 mm and 4987 for GSV size ≥5 mm. Patients in group 1 were more likely to be women (81.7% vs 68.4%; P = .001) and older (56.8 vs 55.6 years; P = .012). The CEAP clinical class was more advanced in group 2 than in group 1 (P = .001). The maximal GSV diameter in group 2 was significantly greater than in group 1 (8.32 vs 3.86 mm; P = .001); 64% of group 2 and 59.2% of group 1 had undergone radiofrequency thermal ablation (P = .001). No mortalities occurred in either group. Group 2 had more complications postoperatively (0.6% vs 0%; P = .027), required postoperative anticoagulation (8.8% vs 5%, P = .001), developed partial recanalization (0.8% vs 0.3%; P = .001), and missed more work days (2.32 vs 1.6 days) compared with group 1. A similar rate of hematoma developed in both groups, but group 1 had a higher rate of paresthesia. Both groups had improvement in the Venous Clinical Severity Score and HASTI (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing, itching) score. The degree of symptomatic improvement between the 2 groups was similar. CONCLUSIONS: All patients demonstrated improvement in both clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes after endovenous ablation, regardless of GSV size. Patients with a preoperative GSV size ≥5 mm experienced similar improvement in symptoms but an increased complication rate. Patients with a smaller vein size should not be denied intervention or coverage by vein size.

Telemedicine platforms and their use in the coronavirus disease-19 era to deliver comprehensive vascular care.

Implementation of telemedicine for patient encounters optimizes personal safety and allows for continuity of patient care. Embracing telehealth reduces the use of personal protective equipment and other resources consumed during in-person visits. The use of telehealth has increased to historic levels in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Telehealth may be a key modality to fight against COVID-19, allowing us to take care of patients, conserve personal protective equipment, and protect health care workers all while minimizing the risk of viral spread. We must not neglect vascular health issues while the coronavirus pandemic continues to flood many hospitals and keep people confined to their homes. Patients are not immune to diseases and illnesses such as stroke, critical limb ischemia, and deep vein thrombosis while being confined to their homes and afraid to visit hospitals. Emerging from the COVID-19 crisis, incorporating telemedicine into routine medical care is transformative. By leveraging digital technology, the authors discuss their experience with the implementation, workflow, coding, and reimbursement issues of telehealth during the COVID-19 era.

Analysis of Outpatient Telemedicine Reimbursement in an Integrated Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Current reimbursement policy surrounding telemedicine has been cited as a barrier for the adaptation of this care model. The objective of this study is to analyze the reimbursement figures for outpatient telemedicine consultation in vascular surgery. METHODS: Patients first underwent synchronous telemedicine visits after receiving point-of-care ultrasound at one of 3 satellite locations of Henry Ford Health System in Michigan. Visit types included new, return, and postoperative patients. Reimbursement information related to payor, adjustment, denial, paid and outstanding balances were recorded for each telemedicine visit. Then, using an enterprise data warehouse, a retrospective analysis was performed for the aforementioned telemedicine visits. The data were analyzed to determine the outcome of total billed charges, number of denied claims, reimbursement per payor, reimbursement per patient, and out-of-pocket costs to the patients. RESULTS: Among 184 virtual clinical encounters, the payors included Aetna US Healthcare, Blue Advantage, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cofinity Plan, Health Alliance Plan, HAP Medicare Advantage, Humana Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, Medicare, Molina Medicaid HMO, United Healthcare, Blue Care Network, Aetna Better Health of Michigan, Priority Health, and self-pay. Among the 15 payors, reimbursement ranged from 0% to 67% of the total charges billed. Among the 184 virtual visits, a grand total of $22,145 was collected or an average of $120.35 per virtual encounter. The breakdown of charges billed was 40% adjusted, 41% paid by insurance, 10% paid by patient, and 13% denied. There were 27 total denials (15%). Denial of payment included telehealth and nontelehealth reasons, citing noncovered charges, payment included for other prior services, new patient quality not met, and not covered by payor. The average out-of-pocket cost to patients was $12.59 per visit. CONCLUSIONS: These reimbursement data validate the economic potential within this new platform of healthcare delivery. As our experience with the business model grows, we expect to see an increase in reimbursement from private payors and acceptance from patients. Within a tertiary care system, telemedicine for chronic vascular disease has proven to be a viable means to reach a broader population base, and without significant cost to the patients.

Outpatient Telemedicine Program in Vascular Surgery Reduces Patient Travel Time, Cost, and Environmental Pollutant Emissions.

BACKGROUND: We analyze the impact of outpatient telemedicine services on the travel burden of vascular surgery patients with regard to distance, time, and cost, as well as the emission of environmental pollutants. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was used to compare the patient travel expenditure and environmental impact associated with telemedicine encounters versus hypothetical in-person traditional consultations for all outpatient virtual care encounters with vascular surgery patients from October 2015 to October 2017. The primary outcomes measured were travel distance saved, travel time saved, travel costs saved, reduction in fuel consumption, and reduction in environmental pollutant emission. RESULTS: Over a two-year period, 146 outpatient telemedicine encounters were conducted among 87 unique patients (61 females, 26 males; mean age, 60 ± 13 years). The average one-way distance saved by the utilization of telemedicine services was 15.6 ± 6.3 miles, with an average roundtrip savings of 31.2 miles. The average one-way travel time saved was 19.5 ± 9.2 minutes, with an average roundtrip savings of 39 minutes. By using telemedicine services, these vascular surgery patients saved an average of $4.26 in gas and parking costs at each telemedicine encounter. The total reduction in passenger vehicle emission of environmental pollutants, including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitric oxides, and volatile organic compounds was 1632 kg, 42,867 g, 3160 g, and 4715 g, respectively, with a total of 194 gallons of gas saved from driving. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of telemedicine services reduces the travel distance, time, and costs for vascular surgery patients. Outpatient telemedicine programs may also provide environmental benefit through the reduction of greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions.

Survival after repair of pararenal and paravisceral abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to review our 27-year clinical experience with open proximal abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, with a focus on long-term survival. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was undertaken of all patients who underwent proximal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between 1986 and 2013 at a tertiary care referral center. Demographics, operative variables, complications, and 30-day mortality were analyzed. Postoperative acute kidney injury was analyzed by the RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, End-stage renal disease)/Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria. Long-term survival was assessed through review of electronic medical records and the Social Security Death Index. Associations between demographics and complications were investigated to determine predictors of long-term survival. RESULTS: The study identified 245 patients. Mean age was 71 years (range, 38-92 years); 69% were men, and 88% were white. Aneurysm type was juxtarenal in 127 patients (52%), suprarenal in 68 patients (28%), and type IV thoracoabdominal in 50 patients (20%). In-hospital mortality was 3.3% (eight patients), and 30-day mortality was 2.9% (seven patients). At least one major complication occurred in 64% of the patients, which included the following: acute kidney injury, 60% (persistent acute kidney injury at discharge, however, was 28%, and hemodialysis at discharge was 1.6%); major pulmonary complications, 22%; myocardial infarction, 4%; visceral ischemia, 2%; and paraplegia, 0.5%. Median follow-up was 54 months. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were 70% at 5 years and 43% at 10 years. Variables associated with poorer survival included congestive heart failure (hazard ratio [HR], 3.5; P < .001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.8; P < .002), and increased aneurysm size at presentation (HR, 1.1; P < .013). Persistent stage 3 acute kidney injury was associated with poor long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: Open surgical repair of proximal abdominal aortic aneurysms can be performed with low mortality. Acute kidney injury is the most frequent complication, but the need for hemodialysis at discharge is low. Long-term survival is favorable. These data should assist in establishing benchmarks for endovascular repair of complex proximal abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Cost analysis of endovenous catheter ablation versus surgical stripping for treatment of superficial venous insufficiency and varicose vein disease.

BACKGROUND: Due to its clinical efficacy and faster recovery, endovenous catheter ablation has become the treatment of choice over surgical intervention for patients with varicose veins secondary to saphenous vein reflux. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of costs was performed on patients undergoing vein stripping, endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA), endovenous laser treatment (EVLT), and phlebectomy of varicosities at a community hospital and a tertiary care hospital in southeastern Michigan. RESULTS: In 2010 to 2011, higher costs resulted in a net loss per case for vein stripping, RFA, and phlebectomy procedures performed in the operating room for the community hospital. In contrast, RFA, EVLT, and phlebectomy procedures performed in an office setting resulted in a net profit for the tertiary care institution. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of saphenous vein reflux and varicose vein disease with vein stripping was associated with higher costs than RFA and EVLT. Endovenous RFA performed in the operating room is associated with net loss per case vs office-based interventions. At present, catheter-based interventions in an office setting can be considered the more cost-effective method for treating patients with superficial venous reflux and varicose veins.