Hospital Prices for Pediatric Tympanostomy Tube Placement and Adenotonsillectomy in 2021.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital prices vary substantially for myringotomy with tympanostomy tube placement (M&T) and adenotonsillectomy (T&A). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently implemented hospital price transparency requirements to help families make financially informed decisions about where to seek care. We sought to determine price availability and the extent of price variation for these procedures. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the Turquoise Health Hospital Rates Data Platform, which extracts prices for facility fees from publicly available hospital chargemasters. We determined the proportion of hospitals serving pediatric patients that published payer-specific prices for M&T and T&A. We additionally characterized the extent of variation in payer-specific prices both across and within hospitals. RESULTS: Approximately 40% (n = 909 of 2,266 hospitals) serving pediatric patients disclosed prices for M&T or T&A. Among disclosing hospitals, across-center ratios (adjusted for Medicare hospital wage indices) ranged from 11.0 (M&T; 10th percentile adjusted median price: $536.80 versus 90th percentile adjusted median price: $5,929.93) to 23.4 (revision adenoidectomy age >12 years; 10th percentile: $393.82 versus 90th percentile: $9,209.88). Median within-center price ratios for procedures ranged from 2.2 to 2.7, indicating that some private payers reimbursed the same hospital more than twice as much as other payers for the same procedure. CONCLUSION: The majority of hospitals serving pediatric patients were non-compliant with federal requirements to disclose prices for M&T and T&A. Among disclosing hospitals, there was wide variation in payer-specific prices between and within institutions. Further research is necessary to understand whether disclosure of prices will enable families to make more financially informed decisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:948-955, 2023.

Compensation Rates for Pediatric Otolaryngology Procedures Under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule in 2021.

INTRODUCTION: The Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) is the basis for physician reimbursement by public and private payers. The PFS values physician services according to the estimated time and intensity required to perform them; intensity reflects the summation of technical skill, cognitive load, and risk-related stress. The fee schedule uses relative value units (RVUs) as a metric that permits comparison across procedures. Recent debate has focused on whether the methods by which the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) estimate procedural intensity are valid. We therefore sought to investigate current CMS estimates of intensity (RVUs/min) for surgical procedures performed by pediatric otolaryngologists. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of fiscal year 2021 PFS valuations for pediatric otolaryngology key indicator procedures specified by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. We additionally examined general otolaryngology procedures, including adenotonsillectomy and tympanostomy tube insertion. We utilized the 2021 Medicare PFS conversion factor of $34.89/RVU to convert intensity (wRVUs/min) to a compensation rate ($/min). Primary outcomes were: (1) total compensation rate and (2) intraservice (i.e., incision-to-closure) compensation rate for each studied procedure. RESULTS: Our study sample included 167 unique procedures. The mean (standard deviation) total compensation rate for all included procedures was $1.35/min ($0.29/min) and the mean intraservice rate was $1.71/min ($0.89/min). Intraservice compensation rates ranged from $-1.50/min (drainage of throat abscess) to $4.75/min (pediatric tracheostomy). DISCUSSION: Total and intraservice compensation rates under the Medicare PFS vary widely for surgical procedures performed by pediatric otolaryngologists. Further investigation is necessary to examine the validity of assumptions underlying these procedural intensity valuations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 133:1739-1744, 2023.

Assessment of Preoperative Functional Status Prior to Major Head and Neck Surgery: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate feasibility of a recently developed preoperative assessment tool, the Vulnerable Elders Surgical Pathways and Outcomes Analysis (VESPA), to characterize the baseline functional status of patients undergoing major head and neck surgery and to examine the relationship between preoperative functional status and postoperative outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with planned data collection. SETTING: Two tertiary care academic hospitals. METHODS: The VESPA was administered prospectively in the preoperative setting. Data on patient demographics, ablative and reconstructive procedures, and outcomes including total length of stay, discharge disposition, delay in discharge, or complex discharge planning (delay or change in disposition) were collected via retrospective chart review. VESPA scores were calculated and risk categories were used to estimate risk of adverse postoperative outcomes using multivariate logistic regression for categorical outcomes and linear regression for continuous variables. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients met study inclusion criteria. The mean (SD) age was 66.4 (11.9) years, and 58.4% of patients were male. Nearly one-fourth described preoperative difficulty in either a basic or instrumental activity of daily living, and 17% were classified as low functional status (ie, high risk) according to the VESPA. Low functional status did not independently predict length of stay but was associated with delayed discharge (odds ratio [OR], 5.0; 95% CI, 1.2-21.3; P = .030) and complex discharge planning (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 1.34-24.2; P = .018). CONCLUSION: The VESPA can identify major head and neck surgical patients with low preoperative functional status who may be at risk for delayed or complex discharge planning. These patients may benefit from enhanced preoperative counseling and more comprehensive discharge preparation.

Compensation Rates for Otolaryngologic Procedures Under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule in 2018.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: Medicare reimbursement for physician work depends on the estimated time and intensity - which encompasses technical skill, cognitive load, and stress - required to perform services. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) quantitatively expresses intensity estimates as compensation rates per unit time. This study aimed to characterize compensation rates under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) for operative procedures commonly performed by otolaryngologists. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of fiscal year 2018 PFS specifications and publicly available Medicare Part B utilization data for the top 100 highest-volume procedures furnished by otolaryngologists to Medicare beneficiaries in inpatient and ambulatory surgical center (ASC) settings between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Co-primary outcomes were the estimated 1) total compensation rate ($/min) and 2) intraservice (i.e., "skin-to-skin" time) compensation rate ($/min) for each included procedure. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 147 unique procedure types (settings non-mutually exclusive): 82 inpatient procedure types (n = 33,907 procedures) and 95 ASC procedure types (n = 34,765 procedures). In the inpatient setting, median total compensation rate and intraservice compensation rates were $1.50/min (interquartile range [IQR]: $1.19/min-$1.65/min) and $2.27/min (IQR: $1.69/min-$2.68/min), respectively. In the ASC setting, median total compensation rate and intraservice compensation rates were $1.48/min (interquartile range [IQR]: $1.27/min-$1.77/min) and $2.39/min (IQR: $1.82/min-$2.91/min), respectively. At the service line level, volume-weighted total (inpatient: $1.91/min, ASC: $1.90/min) and intraservice (inpatient: $3.84/min, ASC: $3.37/min) compensation rates were highest for rhinologic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation rates under the Medicare PFS varied widely for operative procedures commonly performed by otolaryngologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:E1785-E1791, 2021.

Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.

Importance: Women comprise an increasing proportion of the otolaryngology workforce. Prior studies have demonstrated gender-based disparity in physician practice and income in other clinical specialties; however, research has not comprehensively examined whether gender-based income disparities exist within the field of otolaryngology. Objective: To determine whether diversity of practice, clinical productivity, and Medicare payment differ between male and female otolaryngologists and whether any identified variation is associated with practice setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of publicly available Medicare data summarizing payments to otolaryngologists from January 1 through December 31, 2017. Male and female otolaryngologists participating in Medicare in facility-based (FB; hospital-based) and non-facility-based settings (NFB; eg, physician office) for outpatient otolaryngologic care were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of unique billing codes (diversity of practice) per physician, number of services provided per physician (physician productivity), and Medicare payment per physician. Outcomes were stratified by practice setting (FB vs NFB). Results: A total of 8456 otolaryngologists (1289 [15.2%] women; 7167 [84.8%] men) received Medicare payments in 2017. Per physician, women billed fewer unique codes (mean difference, -2.10; 95% CI, -2.46 to -1.75; P < .001), provided fewer services (mean difference, -640; 95% CI, -784 to -496; P < .001), and received less Medicare payment than men (mean difference, -$30 246 (95% CI, -$35 738 to -$24 756; P < .001). When stratified by practice setting, women in NFB settings billed 1.65 fewer unique codes (95% CI, -2.01 to -1.29; P < .001) and provided 633 fewer services (95% CI, -791 to -475; P < .001). In contrast, there was no significant gender-based difference in number of unique codes billed (mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.217 to 0.347; P = .81) or number of services provided (mean difference, 5.1; 95% CI, -55.8 to 45.6; P = .85) in the FB setting. Women received less Medicare payment in both settings compared with men (NFB: mean difference, -$27 746; 95% CI, -$33 502 to -$21 989; P < .001; vs FB: mean difference, -$4002; 95% CI, -$7393 to -$612; P = .02), although the absolute difference was lower in the FB setting. Conclusions and Relevance: Female sex is associated with decreased diversity of practice, lower clinical productivity, and decreased Medicare payment among otolaryngologists. Gender-based inequity is more pronounced in NFB settings compared with FB settings. Further efforts are necessary to better evaluate and address gender disparities within otolaryngology.

Revaluation of Otolaryngologic Procedures With 10- and 90-Day Global Periods in the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule.

A recent investigation by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) suggests that physicians provide fewer postoperative visits (POVs) than expected for procedures with 10- and 90-day global periods. CMS is now contemplating revaluation of these procedures, which could result in lower Medicare payments to otolaryngologists. To estimate the impact of such reform on otolaryngologic procedures, we conducted a secondary subgroup analysis of CMS-contracted research, which used claims-based estimates of POVs to revalue procedures with 10- and 90-day global periods. Among the top 10 highest volume procedures performed in 2018, the proportion of median physician-reported to CMS-expected POVs ranged between 0.0% (myringotomy ± ventilation tube insertion, mouth biopsy, and complex wound repair) and 40.0% (total thyroidectomy). The top 5 procedures accounted for nearly three-quarters ($6.2 million and $8.6 million; 72.6%) of the estimated Medicare payment reduction. Further study is necessary to guide the development of equitable and effective payment reform.

Trends in Ambulatory Surgery Center Utilization for Otolaryngologic Procedures among Medicare Beneficiaries, 2010-2017.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical care is increasingly shifting to freestanding ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs). The extent to which otolaryngologists use ASCs has implications for patient safety and health care spending. This study characterizes trends in utilization and resultant financial implications for common otolaryngologic procedures performed at ASC and hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: ASCs, HOPDs. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects included Medicare beneficiaries undergoing outpatient otolaryngologic procedures between 2010 and 2017. Procedures included the 20 highest-volume procedures performed by otolaryngologists at ASCs in 2017. Main outcomes included absolute and relative percentage difference in the proportion of procedures furnished at ASCs and HOPDs and estimated Medicare cost savings resulting from increased ASC utilization between 2011 and 2017. RESULTS: The proportion of outpatient otolaryngologic procedures performed at ASCs increased by 1.8% (relative difference: 10.0%; mean annual relative increase: 1.60%), and the proportion located at HOPDs decreased by 6.0% (relative difference: -11.8%; mean annual relative decrease: -1.6%) between 2010 and 2017. Rhinoplasty accounted for the largest absolute increase in ASC utilization over the study period (absolute [relative] 8.9% [33.5%]). Increased ASC utilization resulted in an estimated $7.1 million in cost savings to Medicare between 2011 and 2017. CONCLUSION: Otolaryngologists shifted outpatient surgical care from HOPDs to ASCs between 2010 and 2017, with resultant reductions in Medicare expenditures. Further research is necessary to examine the impact of this shift on patient safety.

Analysis of Potential Conflicts of Interest among Otolaryngologic Patient Advocacy Organizations in 2016.

Patient advocacy organizations (PAOs) are nonprofits dedicated to benefiting patients and their families through activities such as education/counseling and research funding. Although medical drug/device companies may serve as important partners, industry donations may bias the efforts of PAOs. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the Kaiser Health News nonprofit database to identify and characterize otolaryngologic PAOs (n = 32) active in 2016. Among these PAOs, half (n = 16, 50.0%) focused on otologic diseases, and mean total annual revenue was $3.1 million. Among the 15 PAOs (46.9%) with publicly available donor lists, 10 (66.7%) received donations from industry. Few PAOs publicly reported the total amount donated by industry (n = 3, 9.4%) or published policies for mitigating potential financial conflicts of interest with donors (n = 3, 9.4%). Requiring drug and device companies to publicly report donations to PAOs may help patients, providers, and policy makers to better understand advocacy by these influential stakeholders.