Medical center reimbursement for vascular procedures has increased over time while professional reimbursement has declined.

OBJECTIVE: The United States healthcare system uses different methods for assigning medical center reimbursement (MCR) and professional reimbursement (PR) for clinical services. We hypothesized that PR has not increased proportionately to MCR for the same vascular services. METHODS: MCR and PR were compared for commonly performed inpatient and outpatient vascular procedures between 2012 and 2021. MCR was calculated using the Medicare inpatient prospective payment system and outpatient prospective payment system. MCR is based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services definition and criteria for comorbidities and the occurrence of complications; thus, changes in MCR were reported as a range based on the degree of comorbidities and complications using the Diagnosis Related Group. PR was calculated using the Medicare physician fee schedule, which assigns a numerical work relative value unit to each surgical service, with final compensation determined by an annually adjusted conversion factor to yield a final dollar amount. The expected reimbursement based on the observed inflation during the study period using the consumer price index was calculated and compared to the actual reimbursement. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2021, MCR for inpatient procedures increased 20% to 26% for carotid endarterectomy, 24% to 27% for femoral endarterectomy, 24% to 27% for femoropopliteal bypass with vein, 14% to 19% for thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and 15% for aortobifemoral bypass. During the same period, PR increased 3.3% for carotid endarterectomy but decreased for femoral endarterectomy (-5.0%), femoropopliteal bypass (-4.6%), thoracic endovascular aortic repair (-4.2%), and aortobifemoral bypass (-5.0%). Comparing the expected reimbursement, adjusted for inflation, to the actual reimbursement, PR experienced a 10% to 17% reduction but MCR outpaced inflation by 3.7% to 10%. For outpatient procedures, MCR increased 117% for tibial angioplasty, 24% for superficial femoral artery (SFA) stenting, 62% for tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) insertion, and 24% for iliac stenting but decreased 0.43% for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation and 7.6% for radiofrequency ablation (RFA). PR increased 0.91% for SFA stenting but decreased for tibial angioplasty (-17%), AVF creation (-6.4%), TDC insertion (-7.1%), iliac stenting (-3.8%), and RFA (-22%). Comparing the expected reimbursement, adjusted for inflation, to the actual reimbursement, PR experienced a 13% to 32% reduction. In contrast, MCR outpaced inflation 7.5% to 88% for tibial angioplasty, SFA stenting, TDC insertion, and iliac stenting but experienced a reduction for AVF (-13%) and RFA (-19%). CONCLUSIONS: MCR for commonly performed vascular procedures has increased and outpaced inflation. In contrast, PR for these same services has decreased across all procedure types. This decrease in PR was exacerbated when adjusted for inflation. This inequity in the reimbursement methods between MCR and PR poses a threat to the viability of the physician workforce. Either changes to the reimbursement methods or a reallocation of reimbursement to physicians are imperative to sustain physician practices.

Impact of "Defensive Medicine" on the Costs of Diabetes and Associated Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Geographic variation in health care spending is typically attributed to differences in patient health status and provider practice patterns. While medicolegal considerations (i.e., "defensive medicine") anecdotally impact health care spending, this phenomenon is difficult to measure. The purpose of this study was to explore the association between the medicolegal environment and Medicare costs for diabetes and associated conditions of interest to vascular surgeons. Specifically, we hypothesized that an adverse medicolegal environment is associated with higher per capita Medicare costs for diabetic patients. METHODS: Medicare data including the most recent (2018) Medicare Geographic Variation Public Use Files and Chronic Conditions Data Files were linked to National Practitioner Data Bank files from the preceding 5 years (2013-2017), in addition to the US census data and American Medical Association workforce statistics. The state-level medicolegal environment was characterized by K-means clustering across a panel of metrics related to malpractice payment magnitude and prevalence. Per capita Medicare spending for diabetes was compared across 5 distinct medicolegal environments. Costs were standardized and risk-adjusted to account for known geographic variation in health care costs and patient population. Analysis of variance was applied to unadjusted data, followed by multivariate regression modeling. Readmission rates, per capita imaging studies, per capita tests, per capita procedures, and lower extremity amputation rates were compared between the least litigious quintile from the K-means clustering and the 2 most litigious quintiles. RESULTS: The median unadjusted Medicare per capita expenditure on diabetic patients was $15,963 ($14,885-$17,673), ranging from $13,762 (Iowa) to $21,865 (D.C.). A 1.6-fold variation persisted after payment standardization. Cluster analysis based on malpractice-related variables yields 5 distinct medicolegal environments, based on litigation frequency and malpractice payment amounts. Per capita spending on diabetes varied, ranging from $15,799 in states with low payments and infrequent litigation to $18,838 in states with the most adverse medicolegal environment (P < 0.05). After cost standardization and risk adjustment with multiple linear regression, malpractice claim prevalence (per 100 physicians) remained an independent predictor of states with the highest diabetes mellitus spending (P = 0.022). Moreover, diabetic patients in states with adverse medicolegal environments had more procedures, imaging studies, and readmissions (P < 0.05 for all) but did not have significant differences in amputation rates compared to less litigious states. CONCLUSIONS: An adverse medicolegal environment is independently associated with higher health care costs but does not result in improved outcome (i.e. amputation rate) for diabetic Medicare beneficiaries. Across states, a 1% increase in lawsuits/100 physicians was associated with a >10% increase in risk-adjusted standardized per capita costs. These findings demonstrate the potential contribution of "defensive medicine" to variation in health care utilization and spending in a population of interest to vascular surgeons.

Practice Patterns of Vascular Surgery's "1%".

BACKGROUND: Public focus on health care spending has increased attention on variation in practice patterns and overutilization of high-cost services. Mainstream news reports have revealed that a small number of providers account for a disproportionate amount of total Medicare payments. Here, we explore variation in Medicare payments among vascular surgeons and compare practice patterns of the most highly reimbursed surgeons to the rest of the workforce. METHODS: 2016 Medicare Provider Utilization Data were queried to identify procedure, charge, and payment data to vascular surgeons, identified by National Provider Identification taxonomy. Commonly performed services (>10/year) were stratified into categories (endovascular, open surgery, varicose vein, evaluation and management, etc.). Practice patterns of vascular surgeons comprising the top 1% Medicare payments (n = 31) were compared with the remainder of the workforce (n = 3,104). RESULTS: In 2016, Medicare payments to vascular surgeons totaled $589 M. 31 vascular surgeons-1% of the workforce-received $91 million (15% of total payments). Practice patterns of the 1% differed significantly from the remainder of vascular surgeons (P < 0.05), with endovascular procedures accounting for 85% of their reimbursement. Specifically, the 1% received 49% of total Medicare payments for atherectomy ($121 M), 98% of which were performed in the office setting. CONCLUSIONS: One percentage of vascular surgeons receive an inordinate amount of total Medicare payments to the specialty. This discrepancy is due to variations in volume, utilization, and site of service. Disproportionate use of outpatient atherectomy in a small number of providers, for example, raises concerns regarding appropriateness and overutilization. Given current scrutiny over health care spending, these findings should prompt serious discussion regarding the utility of personal and societal self-regulation.