Characterization of Biopsies by Dermatologists and Nonphysician Providers in the Medicare Population: A Rapidly Changing Landscape.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies show that nonphysician providers may require a higher number of biopsies to identify skin malignancies than dermatologists. Therefore, understanding the trends behind the types of providers performing biopsies may help analyze their impact on this vulnerable population. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study analyzes changes in nationwide, regional, and state-level data on the number and proportion of biopsies performed by dermatologists compared with nonphysician providers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Biopsy cases were isolated in the Medicare database from 2012 to 2018 using the HCPCS codes 11,100 and 11,101. Cases were limited to biopsies performed by a dermatologist, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA). RESULTS: From 2012 to 2018, national biopsy rates per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries for dermatologists decreased by 6%, whereas those for NPs and PAs increased by 97% and 82%, respectively. Each state showed variation in both the proportion of biopsies by provider type and the net change in biopsies rates over time. All states saw increases in the number of biopsies per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries by nonphysician providers. CONCLUSION: As the number of Medicare beneficiaries continues to grow, nonphysician providers are performing an increasing proportion of biopsies, with specific states and regions being affected more than others.

Primary Care's Historic Role in Vaccination and Potential Role in COVID-19 Immunization Programs.

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic recovery will require a broad and coordinated effort for infection testing, immunity determination, and vaccination. With the advent of several COVID-19 vaccines, the dissemination and delivery of COVID-19 immunization across the nation is of concern. Previous immunization delivery patterns may reveal important components of a comprehensive and sustainable effort to immunize everyone in the nation. METHODS: The delivery of vaccinations were enumerated by provider type using 2017 Medicare Part B Fee-For-Service data and the 2013-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The delivery of these services was examined at the service, physician, and visit level. RESULTS: In 2017 Medicare Part B Fee-For-Service, primary care physicians provided the largest share of services for vaccinations (46%), followed closely by mass immunizers (45%), then nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NP/PAs) (5%). The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey showed that primary care physicians provided most clinical visits for vaccination (54% of all visits). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians have played a crucial role in delivery of vaccinations to the US population, including the elderly, between 2012-2017. These findings indicate primary care practices may be a crucial element of vaccine counseling and delivery in the upcoming COVID-19 recovery and immunization efforts in the United States.

Exploring the impact of a decision support algorithm to improve clinicians' chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy assessment and management practices: a two-phase, longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) negatively affects physical function and chemotherapy dosing, yet, clinicians infrequently document CIPN assessment and/or adhere to evidence-based CIPN management in practice. The primary aims of this two-phase, pre-posttest study were to explore the impact of a CIPN clinician decision support algorithm on clinicians' frequency of CIPN assessment documentation and adherence to evidence-based management. METHODS: One hundred sixty-two patients receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy (e.g., taxanes, platinums, or bortezomib) answered patient-reported outcome measures on CIPN severity and interference prior to three clinic visits at breast, gastrointestinal, or multiple myeloma outpatient clinics (n = 81 usual care phase [UCP], n = 81 algorithm phase [AP]). During the AP, study staff delivered a copy of the CIPN assessment and management algorithm to clinicians (N = 53) prior to each clinic visit. Changes in clinicians' CIPN assessment documentation (i.e., index of numbness, tingling, and/or CIPN pain documentation) and adherence to evidence-based management at the third clinic visit were compared between the AP and UCP using Pearson's chi-squared test. RESULTS: Clinicians' frequency of adherence to evidence-based CIPN management was higher in the AP (29/52 [56%]) than the UCP (20/46 [43%]), but the change was not statistically significant (p = 0.31). There were no improvements in clinicians' CIPN assessment frequency during the AP (assessment index = 0.5440) in comparison to during the UCP (assessment index = 0.6468). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a clinician-decision support algorithm did not significantly improve clinicians' CIPN assessment documentation or adherence to evidence-based management. Further research is needed to develop theory-based implementation interventions to bolster the frequency of CIPN assessment and use of evidence-based management strategies in practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT03514680 . Registered 21 April 2018.

Advanced Practice Providers Utilization Trends in Otolaryngology From 2012 to 2017 in the Medicare Population.

OBJECTIVE: Nurse practitioners and physician assistants form a growing advanced practice provider (APP) group. We aim to analyze the trends and types of services provided by APPs in otolaryngology. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use Files, 2012-2017. METHODS: The Medicare database was searched for 13 commonly used otolaryngology-specific Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, and 10 evaluation and management (E/M) codes were evaluated by provider type. Changes in code utilization were compared between physicians and APPs over time. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2017, there was a 51% increase in the number of otolaryngology APPs, compared to a 2.2% increase in physician providers. APPs increased their share of new and established patient visits from 4% to 7%d 11% to 15%, respectively. There was not a significant difference over time in number of patient visits performed annually per provider according to provider type. The increase in number of APP vs physician providers was significantly greater for every procedure except for balloon sinus dilation and tympanostomy tube placement. CONCLUSION: Due to increasing numbers, APPs are accounting for more patient visits and procedures over time. The physician workforce and the numbers of procedures performed per physician have remained relatively stable from 2012 to 2017. Increasing complexity of patients seen and a broader range of procedures offered by work-experienced or postgraduate-trained APPs may further improve access to health care in the face of possible physician shortages.

Determinants of rural-urban differences in health care provider visits among women of reproductive age in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Rural health disparities and access gaps may contribute to higher maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. Understanding and addressing access barriers for specialty women's health services is important in mitigating risks for adverse childbirth events. The objective of this study was to investigate rural-urban differences in health care access for women of reproductive age by examining differences in past-year provider visit rates by provider type, and quantifying the contributing factors to these findings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a nationally-representative sample of reproductive age women (n = 37,026) from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2010-2015) linked to the Area Health Resource File, rural-urban differences in past-year office visit rates with health care providers were examined. Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analysis quantified the portion of disparities explained by individual- and county-level sociodemographic and provider supply characteristics. Overall, there were no rural-urban differences in past-year visits with women's health providers collectively (65.0% vs 62.4%), however differences were observed by provider type. Rural women had lower past-year obstetrician-gynecologist (OB-GYN) visit rates than urban women (23.3% vs. 26.6%), and higher visit rates with family medicine physicians (24.3% vs. 20.9%) and nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NPs/PAs) (24.6% vs. 16.1%). Lower OB-GYN availability in rural versus urban counties (6.1 vs. 13.7 providers/100,000 population) explained most of the rural disadvantage in OB-GYN visit rates (83.8%), and much of the higher family physician (80.9%) and NP/PA (50.1%) visit rates. Other individual- and county-level characteristics had smaller effects on rural-urban differences. CONCLUSION: Although there were no overall rural-urban differences in past-year visit rates, the lower OB-GYN availability in rural areas appears to affect the types of health care providers seen by women. Whether rural women are receiving adequate specialized women's health care services, while seeing a different cadre of providers, warrants further investigation and has particular relevance for women experiencing high-risk pregnancies and deliveries.

Reexamining the persisting wage gap between male and female PAs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the magnitude of any difference in total compensation between male and female physician assistants (PAs) after controlling for personal and workplace factors related to compensation. METHODS: Using data from the 2019 AAPA Salary Survey, the authors conducted a sequential regression analysis to examine the relationship between a variety of personal and practice demographics and total compensation. RESULTS: After controlling for compensation-related factors, a wage gap between male and female PAs persisted: female PAs were paid almost $0.93 for every $1 male PAs were paid in the first year of work ($9,010 less). This wage gap widened by $201 for every year of work experience. CONCLUSIONS: A wage gap between male and female PAs persists even after including all compensation types and controlling for compensation-related factors that may differ between male and female PAs. Proposed policy implications could begin to mitigate the gap.

PA job availability in primary care during 2014 and 2016.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this project was to evaluate demand for PAs by examination of job postings. We compared proportions of PAs in primary care with proportions of job postings in primary care in 2014 and 2016 and described job postings for PAs by specialty in 2014 and 2016. METHODS: Internet job postings for PAs supplied by Burning Glass Technologies were evaluated for practice specialty. Job postings were compared with existing filled positions by specialty as reported by the National Commission for the Certification of Physician Assistants. RESULTS: In both years, more than 25% of PAs in practice were in primary care and fewer than 20% of job openings were in primary care. More than half of postings were in medical and surgical subspecialties. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide insights into which specialties have emerging high demand for PAs. The demand for PAs appears to remain much stronger for specialty jobs than for primary care jobs.

Utilization and Costs by Primary Care Provider Type: Are There Differences Among Diabetic Patients of Physicians, Nurse Practitioners, and Physician Assistants?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs among diabetes patients with physician, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA) primary care providers (PCPs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Cohort study using Veterans Affairs (VA) electronic health record data to examine the relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs over 1 year in 368,481 adult, diabetes patients. Relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs in 2013 was examined with extensive adjustment for patient and facility characteristics. Emergency department and outpatient analyses used negative binomial models; hospitalizations used logistic regression. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models. RESULTS: PCPs were physicians, NPs, and PAs for 74.9% (n=276,009), 18.2% (n=67,120), and 6.9% (n=25,352) of patients respectively. Patients of NPs and PAs have lower odds of inpatient admission [odds ratio for NP vs. physician 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-0.93; PA vs. physician 0.92, 95% CI=0.87-0.97], and lower emergency department use (0.67 visits on average for physicians, 95% CI=0.65-0.68; 0.60 for NPs, 95% CI=0.58-0.63; 0.59 for PAs, 95% CI=0.56-0.63). This translates into NPs and PAs having ~$500-$700 less health care costs per patient per year (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Expanded use of NPs and PAs in the PCP role for some patients may be associated with notable cost savings. In our cohort, substituting care patterns and creating similar clinical situations in which they practice, NPs and PAs may have reduced costs of care by up to 150-190 million dollars in 2013.

Impact of nonphysician providers on spatial accessibility to primary care in Iowa.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of nonphysician providers on measures of spatial access to primary care in Iowa, a state where physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses are considered primary care providers. DATA SOURCES: 2017 Iowa Health Professions Inventory (Carver College of Medicine), and minor civil division (MCD) level population data for Iowa from the American Community Survey. STUDY DESIGN: We used a constrained optimization model to probabilistically allocate patient populations to nearby (within a 30-minute drive) primary care providers. We compared the results (across 10 000 scenarios) using only primary care physicians with those including nonphysician providers (NPPs). We analyze results by rurality and compare findings with current health professional shortage areas. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Physicians and NPPs practicing in primary care in 2017 were extracted from the Iowa Health Professions Inventory. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Considering only primary care physicians, the average unallocated population for primary care was 222 109 (7 percent of Iowa's population). Most of the unallocated population (86 percent) was in rural areas with low population density (< 50/square mile). The addition of NPPs to the primary care workforce reduced unallocated population by 65 percent to 78 252 (2.5 percent of Iowa's population). Despite the majority of NPPs being located in urban areas, most of the improvement in spatial accessibility (78 percent) is associated with sparsely populated rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of nonphysician providers greatly reduces but does not eliminate all areas of inadequate spatial access to primary care.

Projected Contributions of Nurse Practitioners and Physicians Assistant to Buprenorphine Treatment Services for Opioid Use Disorder in Rural Areas.

The United States is experiencing an opioid use disorder epidemic. The Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act allows nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) to obtain a Drug Enforcement Administration waiver to prescribe medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder. This study projected the potential increase in MAT availability provided by NPs and PAs for rural patients. Using workforce and survey data, and state scope of practice regulations, the number of treatment slots that could be provided by NPs and PAs was estimated for rural areas. NPs and PAs are projected to increase the number of rural patients treated with buprenorphine by 10,777 (15.2%). Census Divisions varied substantially in the number of projected new treatment slots per 10,000 population (0.8-10.6). The New England and East South Central Census Divisions are projected to have the largest population-adjusted increase. NPs and PAs have considerable potential to reduce substantial MAT access disparities.

Analysis of a high-prescribing state's 2016 outpatient antibiotic prescriptions: Implications for outpatient antimicrobial stewardship interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To identify prescriber characteristics that predict antibiotic high-prescribing behavior to inform statewide antimicrobial stewardship interventions. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 2016 IQVIA Xponent, formerly QuintilesIMS, outpatient retail pharmacy oral antibiotic prescriptions in Tennessee. SETTING: Statewide retail pharmacies filling outpatient antibiotic prescriptions. PARTICIPANTS: Prescribers who wrote at least 1 antibiotic prescription filled at a retail pharmacy in Tennessee in 2016. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression, including prescriber gender, birth decade, specialty, and practice location, and patient gender and age group, to determine the association with high prescribing. RESULTS: In 2016, 7,949,816 outpatient oral antibiotic prescriptions were filled in Tennessee: 1,195 prescriptions per 1,000 total population. Moreover, 50% of Tennessee's outpatient oral antibiotic prescriptions were written by 9.3% of prescribers. Specific specialties and prescriber types were associated with high prescribing: urology (odds ratio [OR], 3.249; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.208-3.289), nurse practitioners (OR, 2.675; 95% CI, 2.658-2.692), dermatologists (OR, 2.396; 95% CI, 2.365-2.428), physician assistants (OR, 2.382; 95% CI, 2.364-2.400), and pediatric physicians (OR, 2.340; 95% CI, 2.320-2.361). Prescribers born in the 1960s were most likely to be high prescribers (OR, 2.574; 95% CI, 2.532-2.618). Prescribers in rural areas were more likely than prescribers in all other practice locations to be high prescribers. High prescribers were more likely to prescribe broader-spectrum antibiotics (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Targeting high prescribers, independent of specialty, degree, practice location, age, or gender, may be the best strategy for implementing cost-conscious, effective outpatient antimicrobial stewardship interventions. More information about high prescribers, such as patient volumes, clinical scope, and specific barriers to intervention, is needed.

Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of Best Practices for the Treatment of Co-Occurring Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder.

Objective: Patients with a combination of chronic pain and opioid use disorder have unique needs and may present a challenge for clinicians and health care systems. The objective of the present study was to use qualitative methods to explore factors influencing the uptake of best practices for co-occurring chronic pain and opioid use disorder in order to inform a quantitative survey assessing primary care provider capacity to appropriately treat this dual diagnosis. Methods: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 primary care providers (PCPs) to inform the development of a questionnaire. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Fifteen comments from an open-ended question on the questionnaire were added to the analyses as they described factors that were not elucidated in the interviews. Barriers and facilitators were identified and categorized using the CFIR codebook. Results: The most frequently described barriers were cost and inadequate access to appropriate treatments, external policies, and available resources (e.g., risk assessment tools). The most frequently described facilitators were the presence of a network or team, patient-specific needs, and the learning climate. Knowledge and beliefs were frequently described as both barriers and facilitators. Conclusions: While substantial funding has been allocated to initiatives aimed at increasing PCP capacity to treat this population, numerous barriers to adopting appropriate practices still exist. Future research should focus on developing and testing implementation strategies that leverage the facilitators and overcome the barriers illustrated here to improve the uptake of evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of co-occurring chronic pain and opioid use disorder.

Advanced practice providers and children's hospital-based pediatric otolarynology practices.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced practice providers (APPs), including nurse practitioners and physician assistants, have been deployed in children's hospital-based academic pediatric otolaryngology practices for many years. However, this relationship in terms of prevalence, roles, financial consequences and satisfaction has not been examined. The objective of this study is to explore how APPs impact healthcare delivery in this setting. METHODS: Pediatric otolaryngology chiefs of all academic children's hospitals in the US were electronically surveyed about the ways APPs intersected clinically and financially in their respective practice. RESULTS: A total of 29 of 36 children's hospital-based pediatric otolaryngology practices completed the survey, of which 26 practices (90%) utilized APP. There were large variances within the APP practice cohort in faculty size (mean/median/range = 9.4/8.5/3-29); annual patient visits (mean/median = 18,373/17,600); number of practice site (mean/median/range = 4.3/4/2-9) and number of outpatient APP (mean/median/range = 6.3/5/1-30). No factors (faculty size, annual visits and number of practice sites) differentiated between the APP and non-APP practices. Among APP practices, significant correlation (p<.00001) was observed between size of APP cohort to faculty size and annual visits. 69% of the practices did not differentiate job functions of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. 85% of the practices utilized APPs in all practice sites and 19% utilized APPs in the operating room. 77% of APPs billed independently and 46% had on-site supervision. The most prevalent APP salary bracket based on 0-5, 6-10 and > 11 years of tenure were $76-100K (65%), $100-150K (77%) and $100-150K (86%), respectively. In 46% of the practices, APPs were able to generate enough revenue to cover more than 75% of their salary and 23% of practices generated a profit. 81% of the chiefs ranked the effectiveness of APPs as high (4 and 5) on a 5-point Likert scale. DISCUSSION: The majority of academic pediatric otolaryngology practices employed APPs. Despite the diversity seen in practice complexity, APP functionality and financial impact, most found the APP model to be beneficial in improving patient care, patient access and faculty productivity.

In Rural Areas, Buprenorphine Waiver Adoption Since 2017 Driven By Nurse Practitioners And Physician Assistants.

Few patients with opioid use disorder receive medication for addiction treatment. In 2017 the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act enabled nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) to obtain federal waivers allowing them to prescribe buprenorphine, a key medication for opioid use disorder. The waiver expansion was intended to increase patients' access to opioid use treatment, which was particularly important for rural areas with few physicians. However, little is known about the adoption of these waivers by NPs or PAs in rural areas. Using federal data, we examined waiver adoption in rural areas and its association with scope-of-practice regulations, which set the extent to which NPs or PAs can prescribe medication. From 2016 to 2019 the number of waivered clinicians per 100,000 population in rural areas increased by 111 percent. NPs and PAs accounted for more than half of this increase and were the first waivered clinicians in 285 rural counties with 5.7 million residents. In rural areas, broad scope-of-practice regulations were associated with twice as many waivered NPs per 100,000 population as restricted scopes of practice were. The rapid growth in the numbers of NPs and PAs with buprenorphine waivers is a promising development in improving access to addiction treatment in rural areas.

Use of Medicare Data to Identify Team-based Primary Care: Is it Possible?

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether Medicare data can be used to identify type and degree of collaboration between primary care providers (PCPs) [medical doctors (MDs), nurse practitioners, and physician assistants] in a team care model. METHODS: We surveyed 63 primary care practices in Texas and linked the survey results to 2015 100% Medicare data. We identified PCP dyads of 2 providers in Medicare data and compared the results to those from our survey. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of dyads in Medicare data at different threshold numbers of shared patients were reported. We also identified PCPs who work in the same practice by Social Network Analysis (SNA) of Medicare data and compared the results to the surveys. RESULTS: With a cutoff of sharing at least 30 patients, the sensitivity of identifying dyads was 27.8%, specificity was 91.7%, and PPV 72.2%. The PPV was higher for MD-nurse practitioner/physician assistant pairs (84.4%) than for MD-MD pairs (61.5%). At the same cutoff, 90% of PCPs identified in a practice from the survey were also identified by SNA in the corresponding practice. In 5 of 8 surveyed practices with at least 3 PCPs, about ≤20% PCPs identified in the practices by SNA of Medicare data were not identified in the survey. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare data can be used to identify shared care with low sensitivity and high PPV. Community discovery from Medicare data provided good agreement in identifying members of practices. Adapting network analyses in different contexts needs more validation studies.

Diagnostic Imaging Examinations Interpreted by Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants: A National and State-Level Medicare Claims Analysis.

OBJECTIVE. Nonphysician providers (NPPs) increasingly perform imaging-guided procedures, but their roles interpreting imaging have received little attention. We characterize diagnostic imaging services rendered by NPPs (i.e., nurse practitioners and physician assistants) in the Medicare population. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Using 1994-2015 Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files, we identified all diagnostic imaging services, including those billed by NPPs, and categorized these by modality and body region. Using 2004-2015 Medicare Part B 5% Research Identifiable File Carrier Files, we separately assessed state-level variation in imaging services rendered by NPPs. Total and relative utilization rates were calculated annually. RESULTS. Between 1994 and 2015 nationally, diagnostic imaging services increased from 339,168 to 420,172 per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries (an increase of 24%). During this same period, diagnostic imaging services rendered by NPPs increased 14,711% (from 36 to 5332 per 100,000 beneficiaries) but still represented only 0.01% and 1.27% of all imaging in 1994 and 2015, respectively. Across all years, radiography and fluoroscopy constituted most of the NPP-billed imaging services and remained constant over time (e.g., 94% of all services billed in 1994 and 2015), representing only 0.01% and 2.1% of all Medicare radiography and fluoroscopy services. However, absolute annual service counts for NPP-billed radiography and fluoroscopy services increased from 10,899 to 1,665,929 services between 1994 and 2015. NPP-billed imaging was most common in South Dakota (7987 services per 100,000 beneficiaries) and Alaska (6842 services per 100,000 beneficiaries) and was least common in Hawaii (231 services per 100,000 beneficiaries) and Pennsylvania (478 services per 100,000 beneficiaries). CONCLUSION. Despite increasing roles of NPPs in health care across the United States, NPPs still rarely interpret diagnostic imaging studies. When they do, it is overwhelmingly radiography and fluoroscopy. Considerable state-to-state variation exists and may relate to local care patterns and scope-of-practice laws.