Large Variation in Listed Chargemaster Price for Total Joint Arthroplasty Among Top Orthopaedic Hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Chargemasters are lists of all services offered by a hospital and their associated cost. This study analyzes chargemaster data to determine price differences among different hospitals for total joint arthroplasty. METHODS: In May 2020, the chargemaster data for highly rated orthopaedic hospitals were accessed, and the diagnostic-related group (DRG) codes related to primary and revision total joint arthroplasty were analyzed (DRGs 466, 467, 468, 469, and 470). The prices listed for each hospital were averaged, and descriptive statistics were calculated. Furthermore, Medicare reimbursement was collected. A subanalysis was performed to determine relationships between geographic and demographic information. RESULTS: The median price for a major hip or knee joint arthroplasty without complications was $68,016 (range: $39,927 to $195,264). The median price of a revision of hip or knee arthroplasty without complications was $90,966 (range: $58,967 to $247,715). The cost of living in the city in which the hospitals are located was weakly correlated with procedure pricing, whereas the median income had no notable relationship to chargemaster pricing. CONCLUSION: The published cost of DRG codes in arthroplasty is widely variable among the top 20 US orthopaedic hospitals, with little correlation to the cost of living or median income of the area.

A 20-Year Analysis of Medicare Reimbursement for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction (2000 to 2020).

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate monetary trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for 30 abdominal wall reconstruction surgical procedures over a 20-year period (2000 to 2020). METHODS: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was used for each of the 30 included current CPT codes, and reimbursement data were extracted. Monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2020 U.S. dollars using changes to the United States consumer price index. The R 2 values for the average annual percentage change and the average total percentage change in reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends for all included procedures. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, the average reimbursement for all procedures decreased by 17.1% from 2000 to 2020. The greatest mean decrease was observed for CPT code 49568 (the implantation of mesh or other prosthesis for open incisional or ventral hernia repair or mesh for closure of débridement for necrotizing soft-tissue infection, -34.4%). The only procedure with an increased adjusted reimbursement rate throughout the study period was CPT code 20680 (+3.9%). From 2000 to 2020, the adjusted reimbursement rate for all included procedures decreased by an average of 0.85% each year, with an average R 2 value of 0.78, indicating a stable decline throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement rates are declining when adjusted for inflation. Increased awareness of these trends is helpful to maintain access to optimal abdominal reconstruction care in the United States.

The Current Relationship Between Surgeon Reimbursement and Patient Complexity in Arthroplasty-A Risk-Payment Analysis of All Primary Joint Replacements Billed to Medicare in 2019.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess surgeon reimbursement among total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients who had differing risk profiles within the Medicare population. METHODS: The "2019 Medicare Physician and Other Provider" file was utilized. In 2019, 441,584 primary total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. All episodes were included. Patient demographics and comorbidity profiles were collected for all patients. Additionally, mean patient hierarchal condition category (HCC) risk scores and physician reimbursements were collected. All procedure episodes were split into 2 cohorts; those with an HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, and those with patient HCC risk scores less than 1.5. Variables were averaged for each cohort and compared. RESULTS: The mean reimbursement across all procedures was $1,068.03. For the sicker patient cohort with a mean HCC risk score of 1.5 or greater, there was a significantly higher rate of all comorbidities compared to the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5. The mean payment across the sicker cohort was $1,059.21, while the mean payment among the cohort with HCC risk score under 1.5 was 1,073.32 (P = .032). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that for Medicare patients undergoing primary TJA in 2019, the mean surgeon reimbursement was lower for primary TJA among sick patients in comparison to their healthier counterparts, although it is difficult to ascertain the impact of this discrepancy. As alternative payment models continue to undergo evaluation and development, these data will be important for the potential advancement of more equitable reimbursement models in arthroplasty care, specifically regarding surgeon reimbursement and possible risk adjustment within such models.

Do Americans Lacking a Local Orthopaedic Surgeon Have Adequate Broadband for Telehealth?

BACKGROUND: Although telehealth holds promise in expanding access to orthopaedic surgical care, high-speed internet connectivity remains a major limiting factor for many communities. Despite persistent federal efforts to study and address the health information technology needs of patients, there is limited information regarding the current high-speed internet landscape as it relates to access to orthopaedic surgical care. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the distribution of practicing orthopaedic surgeons in the United States relative to the presence of broadband internet access? (2) What geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic factors are associated with the absence of high-speed internet and access to a local orthopaedic surgeon? METHODS: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Mapping Broadband in America interactive tool was used to determine the proportion of county residents with access to broadband-speed internet for all 3141 US counties. Data regarding the geographic distribution of orthopaedic surgeons and county-level characteristics were obtained from the 2015 Physician Compare National Downloadable File and the Area Health Resource File, respectively. The FCC mapping broadband public use files are considered the most comprehensive datasets describing high-speed internet infrastructure within the United States. The year 2015 represents the most recently available FCC data for which county-level broadband penetration estimates are available. Third-party audits of the FCC data have shown that broadband expansion has been slow over the past decade and that many large improvements have been driven by changes in the reporting methodology. Therefore, we believe the 2015 FCC data still hold relevance. The primary outcome measure was the simultaneous absence of at least 50% broadband penetration and at least one orthopaedic surgeon practicing in county limits. Statistical analyses using Kruskal-Wallis tests and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to assess for factors associated with inaccessibility to orthopaedic telehealth. All statistical tests were two-sided with a significance threshold of p < 0.05. RESULTS: In 2015, 14% (448 of 3141) of counties were considered "low access" in that they both had no orthopaedic surgeons and possessed less than 50% broadband access. A total of 4,660,559 people lived within these low-access counties, representing approximately 1.4% (4.6 million of 320.7 million) of the US population. After controlling for potential confounding variables, such as the age, sex, income level, and educational attainment, lower population density per square mile (OR 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.94]; p < 0.01), a lower number of primary care physicians per 100,000 (OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81 to 0.97]; p < 0.01), a higher unemployment level (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.4]; p < 0.01), and greater number preventable hospital stays per 100,000 (OR 1.01 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.02]; p < 0.01) were associated with increased odds of being a low-access county (though the effect size of the finding was small for population density and number of primary care physicians). Stated another way, each additional person per square mile was associated with an 8% (95% CI 6% to 10%; p < 0.01) decrease in the odds of being a low-access county, and each additional percentage point of unemployment was associated with a 30% (95% CI 20% to 40%) increase in the odds of being a low-access county. CONCLUSION: Despite the potential for telehealth programs to improve the delivery of high-quality orthopaedic surgical care, broadband internet access remains a major barrier to implementation. Until targeted investments are made to expand broadband infrastructure across the country, health systems, policymakers, and surgeon leaders must capitalize on existing federal subsidy programs, such as the lifeline or affordability connectivity initiatives, to reach unemployed patients living in economically depressed regions. The incorporation of internet access questions into clinic-based social determinants screening may facilitate the development of alternative follow-up protocols for patients unable to participate in synchronous videoconferencing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Some orthopaedic patients lack the broadband capacity necessary for telehealth visits, in which case surgeons may pursue alternative methods of follow-up such as mobile phone-based surveillance of postoperative wounds, surgical sites, and clinical symptoms.

Assessment of Clinician Diagnostic Concordance With Video Telemedicine in the Integrated Multispecialty Practice at Mayo Clinic During the Beginning of COVID-19 Pandemic From March to June 2020.

Importance: There was a shift in patient volume from in-person to video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To determine the concordance of provisional diagnoses established at a video telemedicine visit with diagnoses established at an in-person visit for patients presenting with a new clinical problem. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a diagnostic study of patients who underwent a video telemedicine consultation followed by an in-person outpatient visit for the same clinical problem in the same specialty within a 90-day window. The provisional diagnosis made during the video telemedicine visit was compared with the reference standard diagnosis by 2 blinded, independent medical reviewers. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine factors significantly related to diagnostic concordance. The study was conducted at a large academic integrated multispecialty health care institution (Mayo Clinic locations in Rochester, Minnesota; Scottsdale and Phoenix, Arizona; and Jacksonville, Florida; and Mayo Clinic Health System locations in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) between March 24 and June 24, 2020. Participants included Mayo Clinic patients residing in the US without age restriction. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to June 2021. Exposures: New clinical problem assessed via video telemedicine visit to home using Zoom Care Anyplace integrated into Epic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Concordance of provisional diagnoses established over video telemedicine visits compared against a reference standard diagnosis. Results: There were 2393 participants in the analysis. The median (IQR) age of patients was 53 (37-64) years; 1381 (57.7%) identified as female, and 1012 (42.3%) identified as male. Overall, the provisional diagnosis established over video telemedicine visit was concordant with the in-person reference standard diagnosis in 2080 of 2393 cases (86.9%; 95% CI, 85.6%-88.3%). Diagnostic concordance by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision chapter ranged from 64.7% (95% CI, 42.0%-87.4%) for diseases of the ear and mastoid process to 96.8% (95% CI, 94.7%-98.8%) for neoplasms. Diagnostic concordance by medical specialty ranged from 77.3% (95% CI, 64.9%-89.7%) for otorhinolaryngology to 96.0% (92.1%-99.8%) for psychiatry. Specialty care was found to be significantly more likely than primary care to result in video telemedicine diagnoses concordant with a subsequent in-person visit (odds ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.30; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This diagnostic study of video telemedicine visits yielded a high degree of diagnostic concordance compared with in-person visits for most new clinical concerns. Some specific clinical circumstances over video telemedicine were associated with a lower diagnostic concordance, and these patients may benefit from timely in-person follow-up.

Medicare Payment for Orthopaedic Oncology Procedures Over the Past 20 Years.

BACKGROUND: Medicare payment has been examined in a variety of medical and surgical specialties. This study examines Medicare payment in the subspecialty of orthopaedic oncology. METHODS: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to obtain payment information from 2000 to 2020 for procedures related to orthopaedic oncology billed to Medicare. RESULTS: For the 38 included orthopaedic oncology procedures, inflation-adjusted Medicare payment decreased an average of 13.6% overall from 2000 to 2020. After adjusting for inflation, the payment for procedures related to spine and pelvis increased by 7.6%, procedures relating to limb salvage increased by 14.6%, procedures associated with the surgical management of complications decreased by 26.9%, and procedures relating to metastatic disease management decreased by 34.8%. CONCLUSION: Medicare payment has declined by 13.6% from 2000 to 2020. This variation in Medicare payment represents a difference in valuation of these procedures by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and could be used to direct healthcare policy.

Publicly Available Pricing Information for Orthopaedic Upper Extremity Procedures in the United States Lacks Transparency and Consistency Between Major Hospitals.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the price variation of various Medicare severity diagnosis-related group codes for orthopaedic upper extremity procedures for the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals using chargemaster price listings from each hospital. Methods: The top 20 orthopaedic hospitals in the United States were determined by querying the U.S. News and World Report's 2020 orthopaedic hospital ranking. This report ranks orthopaedic hospitals according to 4 major domains: outcomes, structure, process/expert opinion, and patient experience. Chargemaster data for the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals was compiled from their websites. Five DRG codes that represented orthopaedic upper extremity procedures were selected, and the pricing information for each was extracted from hospital chargemasters. The median income and cost-of-living index were also compiled for the county that each hospital is located in so that pricing data could be compared to economic measures through regression analysis. Results: Of the top 20 orthopaedic hospitals, 18 had publicly available pricing information in DRG format on their websites. The DRG code with the highest pricing variability was Hand Injury Procedures (DRG 906; range, $12,832-$253,633). The procedure with the least pricing variability was Hand or Wrist Procedures (DRG 514; range, $24,533-$128,403). Additionally, only the cost of living index was a statistically significant predictor of procedure pricing with a weak correlation. Conclusion: Hospital chargemaster listings are lacking in 2 major areas: true price transparency and standardization/consistency between hospitals. Chargemaster data are often difficult to find, confusing to patients, and inaccurate. Additionally, the price range for a single DRG code can also vary substantially depending on the hospital. It is possible that hospitals located in areas with high costs of living and median incomes would charge higher prices, but these factors were not found to support this hypothesis.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Lumbar Fusion Procedures: 2000-2019.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar fusions are commonly performed spinal procedures. Despite this, publicly available lumbar fusion procedural and monetary data are sparse. This study aimed to evaluate trends in utilization and reimbursement for Medicare patients from 2000-2019. METHODS: Medicare National Summary Data Files were used. Data were collected for true physician reimbursements and procedural rates for posterolateral fusion, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from 2000-2019. Reimbursement was adjusted to inflation utilizing the 2019 Consumer Price Index. RESULTS: From 2000-2019, 1,266,942 lumbar fusion procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. Annual number of lumbar interbody fusion procedures increased by 57,740 procedures (+95%) from 61,017 in 2000 to 118,757 in 2019. This change in annual volume varied by procedure type, with posterolateral fusion increasing from 24,873 procedures in 2000 to 45,665 procedures in 2019 (+20,792, +83.59%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion increasing from 4227 in 2000 to 29,285 procedures in 2019 (+25,058, 592.81%), PLIF increasing from 5579 procedures in 2000 to 5628 procedures in 2019 (+49, +0.88%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion increasing from 26,338 procedures in 2012 to 38,179 procedures in 2019 (+11,841, +44.96%). The mean inflation-adjusted reimbursement decreased for posterolateral fusion from $1662.96 to $1245.85 (-$417.11, -25.08%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion from $1159.45 to $750.33 (-$409.12, -35.29%), PLIF from $1225.02 to $1223.72 (-$1.3, -0.11%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from $1541.59 per procedure in 2012 to $1467.08 per procedure in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar fusions have increased in the last 2 decades, although reimbursement for all procedures has decreased. Knowledge of these trends is important to ensure adequate resource allocation to surgeons as treating lumbar pathologies becomes more common among the aging Medicare population.

Getting paid less for more: shoulder arthroplasty incidence and reimbursement within Medicare from 2000 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroplasty has grown in popularity in the past 2 decades, especially following US Food and Drug Administration approval of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in 2003. Studies have shown that Medicare reimbursement for a variety of orthopedic procedures has decreased significantly over the past 2 decades. No study has evaluated this trend in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty, however. The purpose of this study was to assess true reimbursement trends in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty since 2000. METHODS: Information was collected from the publicly available Medicare Part B National Summary Data Files for the period of 2000 to 2019. Data from Current Procedural Terminology codes 23470 (shoulder hemiarthroplasty), 23472 (TSA), 23473 (single-component revision shoulder arthroplasty), and 23474 (both-component revision shoulder arthroplasty) were analyzed. Reimbursement amounts were adjusted for inflation to May 2021 dollars. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2019, the number of shoulder hemiarthroplasty procedures billed to Medicare decreased 70% (from 5847 to 1750) whereas the number of TSA procedures increased 1527% (from 4044 to 65,477). During the same period, per-procedure Medicare reimbursement for hemiarthroplasty decreased 35% (from $1545.71 to $1003.43) after adjustment for inflation to 2021 dollars. Similarly, TSA reimbursement decreased 22% (from $1600.98 to $1248.76) after adjustment for inflation. For revision procedures, the number of single- and both-component revisions billed to Medicare increased 381% (from 344 to 1655) and 1331% (from 220 to 3147), respectively. Adjusted reimbursement per procedure decreased 36% (from $1931.62 to $1244.49) and 37% (from $2293.08 to $1449.43), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows an increase in the annual volume of primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2019. During the same period (2000-2019), true Medicare reimbursement to physicians for TSA decreased when adjusted for inflation. This study provides data that may be useful for surgeons, hospitals, and policy makers to maintain access to quality shoulder arthroplasty care moving forward.

National and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for orthopedic shoulder and upper extremity surgery from 2000 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information regarding financial trends in orthopedic upper extremity surgery. If progress is to be made in advancing agreeable reimbursement models, a more comprehensive understanding of these trends is needed. The purpose of this study was to assess national and geographic trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for shoulder and elbow surgical procedures over the past 2 decades. METHODS: The 10 most billed Common Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for both orthopedic shoulder surgery and elbow/upper arm surgery were determined. Medicare reimbursement data for these CPT codes were compiled between 2000 and 2020 and adjusted for inflation. The percentage change for each procedure and the average change in reimbursement each year were analyzed. Data from 2000, 2010, and 2020 were organized by state. The total percent change in physician fee and the percent change per year were tabulated for each CPT code using inflation-adjusted data and averaged by state. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2020, when corrected for inflation, shoulder and elbow procedures decreased on average by 29.3% and 24.5%, respectively. Shoulder procedures experienced a greater numerical yet statistically insignificant decline in mean reimbursement percent decrease (P = .16), average percent decrease per year (P = .11), a more negative compound annual growth rate (P = .14), and a greater R-squared value as compared with elbow and upper arm procedures. For shoulder procedures, the average percent difference in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2020 varied from -22.6% in Alaska to -34.1% in Michigan; division data varied from -27.8% in the Mountain Division to -31.2% in the East North Central Division; and region data varied from -28.3% in the West to -30.5% in the Northeast. For elbow and upper arm procedures, the average percent difference in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2020 varied from -17.6% in Alaska to -29.8% in Michigan; division data varied from -23.0% in the Mountain Division to -26.7% in the East North Central Division; and region data varied from -23.5% in the West to -25.7% in the Northeast. DISCUSSION: Inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement in upper extremity surgery has decreased markedly between 2000 and 2020. The degree of decrease varies geographically. If access to quality and sustainable surgical orthopedic care is to persist in the United States, increased awareness of these trends is important. The trends identified in this study can serve to customize regional health care policymaking.

Temporal and Geographic Trends in Medicare Reimbursement of Primary and Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty: 2000 to 2020.

INTRODUCTION: A comprehensive understanding of the trends for financial reimbursement of shoulder arthroplasty is important as progress is made toward achieving sustainable payment models in orthopaedics. This study analyzes Medicare reimbursement trends for shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesize that Medicare reimbursement has decreased for shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2020 and that revision procedures have experienced greater decreases in reimbursement. METHODS: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was queried for each Current Procedural Terminology code used in shoulder arthroplasty, and physician reimbursement data were extracted. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2020 US dollars. Both the average annual and the total percentage change in surgeon reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends for all included procedures. Mean percentage change in adjusted reimbursement among primary procedures in comparison to revision procedures was calculated. The mean reimbursement was assessed and visually represented by geographic state. RESULTS: The average reimbursement for all shoulder arthroplasty procedures decreased by 35.5% from 2000 to 2020. Revision total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) experienced the greatest mean decrease (-44.6%), whereas primary TSA (-23.9%) experienced the smallest mean decrease. The adjusted reimbursement rate for all included procedures decreased by an average of 1.8% each year. The mean reimbursement for revision procedures decreased more than the mean reimbursement for primary procedures (-41.1% for revision, -29.9% for primary; P < 0.001). The mean reimbursement for TSA in 2020, and the percent change in reimbursement from 2000 to 2020, varied by state. DISCUSSION: Medicare reimbursement for shoulder arthroplasty procedures has decreased from 2000 to 2020, with revision procedures experiencing the greatest decrease. Increased awareness and consideration of these trends will be important as healthcare reform evolves, and reimbursements for large joint arthroplasty are routinely adjusted.

An Analysis of Medicare Reimbursement for Neurosurgeon Office Visits: 2010 Compared to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Trends in Medicare billing and procedural reimbursement for outpatient office visits remain unclear within the field of neurosurgery. OBJECTIVE: To analyze financial trends of neurosurgeon reimbursement for Medicare office visits in 2010 compared to 2018. METHODS: The 2010 and 2018 physician/supplier files from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services website were utilized. All payments submitted by neurosurgeons (provider ID 14) were included. Trends in office visit Current Procedural Terminology codes 99201 to 99205 and 99211 to 99215 were analyzed. RESULTS: Neurosurgeons billed for 1 109 979 office visits (463 611 h) in 2010 and Medicare denied 63 704 payments (totaling $11 205 283). Neurosurgeons billed for 1 189 046 office visits (508 526 h) in 2018 and Medicare denied 57 048 payments (totaling $15 103 879). This is a 7.1% increase in total neurosurgery office visits billed to Medicare, 9.7% increase in total office hours, and 34.8% increase in the payment amounts denied over 8 yr. Furthermore, after adjusting for inflation, the average amount paid to physicians by Medicare decreased by 8.3% per office visit. Additionally, Medicare paid 36.1% of the total neurosurgeon submitted charge amount for all office visits in 2010 but paid only 27.8% in 2018 (-8.3%). CONCLUSION: Neurosurgeons are performing more office visits and billing for more time with patients. Meanwhile, Medicare has been paying physicians less per office visit, denying higher amounts of payments and reimbursing a decreasing percentage of submitted charges for office visits. An understanding of these trends is necessary to ensure continued equity and quality access to neurosurgical care in the United States.

Management of ankle injuries in professional basketball players: Prevalence and rehabilitation.

Basketball is a popular internationally played sport. With the physical requirements the game has on athletes, players are at risk of injury. Ankle injuries are the most common injury type suffered by basketball players. In this comprehensive review, we present an analysis and overview of the most common ankle injuries among basketball players, including sprains, fractures, impingement, and Achilles tendon pathology. The review includes treatment modalities for such injuries. More research is warranted regarding prevention strategies.

Procedure Reimbursement, Inflation, and the Declining Buying Power of the Vascular Surgeon (2011-2021).

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in Medicare reimbursement for common vascular procedures over the last decade. To enrich the context of this analysis, vascular procedure reimbursement is directly compared to inflation-adjusted changes in other surgical specialties. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary file was utilized to identify the 20 procedures most commonly performed by vascular surgeons from 2011-2021. A similar analysis was performed for orthopedic, general, and neurological surgeons. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician-Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool was queried for each procedure, and reimbursement data was extracted. All monetary data was adjusted for inflation to 2021 dollars utilizing the consumer price index. Average year-over-year and total percentage change in reimbursement were calculated based on adjusted data for included procedures. Comparisons to other specialty data were made with ANOVA. RESULTS: From 2011-2021, the average, unadjusted change in reimbursement for vascular procedures was -7.2%. Accounting for inflation, the average procedural reimbursement declined by 20.1%. The greatest decline was observed in phlebectomy of varicose veins (-50.6%). Open arteriovenous fistula revision was the only vascular procedure with an increase in inflation-adjusted reimbursement (+7.5%). Year-over-year, inflation-adjusted reimbursement for common vascular procedures decreased by 2.0% per year. Venous procedures experienced the largest decrease in average adjusted reimbursement (-42.4%), followed by endovascular (-20.1%) and open procedures (-13.9%). These changes were significantly different across procedural subgroups (P < 0.001). During the same period, the average adjusted change in reimbursement for the 20 most common procedures in orthopedic surgery, general surgery, and neurosurgery was -11.6% vs. -20.1% for vascular surgery (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Medicare reimbursement for common surgical procedures has declined over the last decade. While absolute reimbursement has remained relatively stable for several procedures, accounting for a decade of inflation demonstrates the true diminution of buying power for equivalent work. The most alarming observation is that vascular surgeons have faced a disproportionate decrease in inflation-adjusted reimbursement in comparison to other surgical specialists. Awareness of these trends is a crucial first step towards improved advocacy and efforts to ensure the "value" of vascular surgery does not continue to erode.

Temporal Analysis of Medicare Physician Reimbursement and Procedural Volume for all Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Procedures Billed to Medicare Part B From 2000 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in annual arthroplasty volume among the Medicare population, as well as assess true Medicare reimbursement to physicians for all hip and knee arthroplasty procedures billed to Medicare since year 2000. METHODS: The publicly available Medicare Part B National Summary Data File from years 2000 to 2019 was utilized. Collected data included true physician reimbursements for all primary total hip and knee, unicompartmental knee, and revision hip/knee arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2019. Monetary data was adjusted for inflation to year 2019 dollars. Change was assessed and compared by procedure type. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2019, physicians billed Medicare Fee-for-service for 8,363,821 hip and knee arthroplasty procedures. During this time, the annual number of included arthroplasty procedures billed to Medicare increased by 100%. From 2000 to 2019 across all included procedures, the mean physician reimbursement after adjusting for inflation decreased by -$729.82 (-38.9%) per procedure. This varied by procedure type. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty was the only procedure to experience an increased mean reimbursement when adjusting for inflation, increasing by $241.40 (+16.6%) per procedure from 2000 to 2019. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates decreasing Medicare reimbursement to physicians within hip and knee arthroplasty from 2000 to 2019 when adjusting for inflation. This study is important for informing the potential development of more equitable payment models and maintaining access for arthroplasty care moving forward.

Trends in Neurosurgical Practice Size: Increased Consolidation 2014-2019.

BACKGROUND: Practice consolidation in healthcare has widespread consequences for providers and patients. Although many studies describe this phenomenon in various medical specialties, no such analysis has been performed in neurosurgery specifically. The goal of this study was to assess the trends in the size of U.S. neurosurgery practices over a 5-year period. METHODS: Neurosurgery practice characteristics were obtained from the Medicare Physician Compare database from March 2014 through October 2019 on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Website. Neurosurgeons were separated on the basis of their practice size. Group practice sizes ranged from solo practitioner practice to large multispecialty groups and health organizations. Eight groups were identified (1 or 2, 3-9, 10-24, 25-49, 50-99, 100-499, 500-999, and ≥1000 members). Additionally, neurosurgery practices were analyzed across the 4 U.S. geographical regions to understand changes in practice size and distribution. RESULTS: The percentage of neurosurgeons in smaller practices of 1 or 2 members decreased, from 20.09% to 13.05%; 3-9 members, from 17.79% to 9.41%; and 10-24 members, from 10.53% to 8.0%. The largest increase was seen in health organizations of 1000 members or more, with an increase from 9.85% to 22.84%. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that over the past 5 years, a substantial trend toward increasing practice sizes has evolved. The effect of the differences in practice size should be examined to determine the large-scale impacts on patient care, payment models, and healthcare access, in addition to neurosurgeon compensation, and satisfaction.

Declining Medicare Reimbursement in Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery: 2000-2020.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate monetary trends in government (Medicare) reimbursement rates for 20 commonly used orthopedic trauma surgical procedures over a 20-year period. METHODS: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was queried for the 20 common Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes in orthopaedic trauma, and reimbursement data were extracted. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2020 US dollars (USD) using changes to the US Consumer Price Index. Both the average annual and the total percentage change in reimbursement and in Relative Value Units were calculated for all included procedures. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, the average reimbursement for all procedures decreased by 30.0% from 2000 to 2020. Total Relative Value Units during this time increased by 4.4% on average. Procedures about the foot and ankle demonstrated the greatest decrease in the mean adjusted reimbursement at -42.6%, whereas procedures about the shoulder and upper extremity demonstrated the smallest mean decrease at 23.7% during the study period. From 2000 to 2020, the adjusted reimbursement rate for all included procedures decreased by an average of 1.5% each year. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to comprehensively evaluate trends in procedural Medicare reimbursement for orthopaedic trauma. When adjusted for inflation, Medicare reimbursement for included procedures has steadily decreased from 2000 to 2020. Increased awareness and consideration of these trends will be important for policy makers, hospitals, and surgeons to assure continued access to meaningful surgical orthopaedic trauma care in the United States.