Medicare reimbursement attributable to catheter-associated urinary tract infection in the inpatient setting: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Most catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are considered preventable and thus a potential target for health care quality improvement and cost savings. OBJECTIVES: We sought to estimate excess Medicare reimbursement, length of stay, and inpatient death associated with CAUTI among hospitalized beneficiaries. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using a retrospective cohort design with linked Medicare inpatient claims and National Healthcare Safety Network data from 2009, we compared Medicare reimbursement between Medicare beneficiaries with and without CAUTIs. SUBJECTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older with continuous coverage of parts A (hospital insurance) and B (supplementary medical insurance). RESULTS: We found that beneficiaries with CAUTI had higher median Medicare reimbursement [intensive care unit (ICU): $8548, non-ICU: $1479) and length of stay (ICU: 8.1 d, non-ICU: 3.6 d) compared with those without CAUTI controlling for potential confounding factors. Odds of inpatient death were higher among beneficiaries with versus without CAUTI only among those with an ICU stay (ICU: odds ratio 1.37). CONCLUSIONS: Beneficiaries with CAUTI had increased Medicare reimbursement and length of stay compared with those without CAUTI after adjusting for potential confounders.

Non-assigned Medicare payment increases practice revenue & lowers Medicare costs.

Private practice physicians can increase practice revenue and also save Medicare money. What seems like a paradox is instead a choice. The non-assigned Medicare payment option allows physicians to bill 8% more for their services. This also decreases Medicare payment 5%. Selecting the non-assigned payment method does not require permission from Medicare or any Medicare contractor. This is a physician decision and for 2014 must be made between mid-November and year end 2013.

The right patient.

This article offers professional opinions and advice on how physicians should prepare in order to protect themselves and their practices during this turbulent time in healthcare reform. This article presents real-life scenarios to help physicians understand what they may face and what actions they should take in anticipation of the future in healthcare. The article focuses on the concept of "the right patient," defining the characteristics of patients that benefit the financial aspect of a practice and those who do not. Its purpose is not to encourage physicians to deny care to patients who are poorly insured or uninsured, but to guide in the establishment of a smart and safe balance between the two. Strategies are discussed on how to attract the right patient and what these patients mean to the practice. The importance of practice marketing is also highlighted, along with an emphasis on the necessity of change in order to survive in the future healthcare environment.

Medicare program; establishing additional Medicare durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS) supplier enrollment safeguards. Final rule.

This final rule will clarify, expand, and add to the existing enrollment requirements that Durable Medical Equipment and Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) suppliers must meet to establish and maintain billing privileges in the Medicare program.

Use of specialty psychiatric settings in constructing DRGs.

Characteristics of a psychiatric setting, such as staffing intensity and scope of services, are examined to see if they contribute to explaining variation in length of stay over that explained by commonly available patient descriptors. For short-stay admissions (less than 31 days), only a small improvement in predictive ability was found. Implications for prospective payment systems are discussed.

Ambulatory patient classifications and the regressive nature of Medicare reform: is the reduction in outpatient health care reimbursement worth the price?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of the proposed Ambulatory Patient Classification (APC) system on reimbursement for hospital outpatient Medicare procedures at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Department of Radiation Oncology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment and cost data for the MGH Department of Radiation Oncology for the fiscal year 1997 were analyzed. This represented 66,981 technical procedures and 41 CPT-4 codes. The cost of each procedure was calculated by allocating departmental costs to the relative value units (RVUs) for each procedure according to accepted accounting principles. Net reimbursement for each CPT-4 procedure was then calculated by subtracting its cost from the allowed 1998 Boston area Medicare reimbursement or from the proposed Boston area APC reimbursement. The impact of the proposed APC reimbursement system on changes in reimbursement per procedure and on volume-adjusted changes in overall net reimbursements per procedure was determined. RESULTS: Although the overall effect of APCs on volume-adjusted net reimbursements for Medicare patients was projected to be budget-neutral, treatment planning revenues would have decreased by 514% and treatment delivery revenues would have increased by 151%. Net reimbursements for less complicated courses of treatment would have increased while those for treatment courses requiring more complicated or more frequent treatment planning would have decreased. Net reimbursements for a typical prostate interstitial implant and a three-treatment high-dose-rate intracavitary application would have decreased by 481% and 632%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The financial incentives designed into the proposed APC reimbursement structure could lead to compromises in currently accepted standards of care, and may make it increasingly difficult for academic institutions to continue to fulfill their missions of research and service to their communities. The ability of many smaller, low patient volume, high Medicare mix hospital-based radiation oncology departments to continue to deliver their current level of care could be compromised. APC reform may carry monetary and opportunity costs which far outweigh its apparent savings. As payment systems continue to place pressure on operating margins, it becomes even more critical that both academic and community radiation oncology practices know the cost of providing services.

Results of continual devaluation of cardiothoracic surgical codes by the HCFA between 1984 and 1999.

BACKGROUND: The devaluation of surgical procedural services by Medicare began in 1989 as a result of the federal government's adoption of the Resource Based Relative Value Scale, a method of redistribution of payments to physicians from surgical to primary care services. This method gave to the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) effective and complete control of Medicare payments to physicians for the first time. The resultant decrease in the nominal dollar value is well understood, but the effect of changes in inflation frequently is not calculated into the reported loss. METHODS: A method of determining the true extent of this devaluation using the nominal dollar decrease plus the effect of inflation was presented in 1995. RESULTS: Since then, repeated devaluation by the HCFA and other third parties plus continual inflation has further eroded the remuneration for cardiothoracic surgical services. Three different sets of data are used to determine the devaluation of five cardiothoracic operations. One set shows the change between 1988 and 1998; one the change between 1988 and 1999; and one the change between 1984 and 1999. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on the geographic location, it appears that the remuneration for pulmonary procedures between 1988 and 1999 decreased 35% to 60%. Similarly, depending on the years reviewed (between 1984 and 1999) and the geographic location, the fee for cardiac procedures decreased 46% to 69%.

Medicare physician payment changes: impact on physicians and beneficiaries.

The Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 generally reduced Medicare payments for surgical services while increasing them for other services. Concern about implications of these fee reductions prompted the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission to sponsor a national survey of physicians to learn their views on Medicare payment and whether access to care has changed for Medicare beneficiaries. Results suggest that beneficiaries' access to care has not declined. While physicians are concerned about Medicare reimbursement, they are more concerned about reimbursement from managed care plans and Medicaid. Continued monitoring will be important to detect any emerging access problems accompanying upcoming payment reductions.

Shortcomings in Medicare bonus payments for physicians in underserved areas.

This study examines trends in Medicare spending for basic payments and bonus payments for physician services provided to beneficiaries residing in nonmetropolitan counties. For our analysis, we used Medicare Part B physician/supplier claims data for 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998. Payments under the congressionally mandated bonus payment program acccounted for less than 1 percent of expenditures for physician services in nonmetropolitan, underserved counties. Physician payments increased from 1992 to 1998, while bonus payments increased through 1996 but then declined by 13 percent by 1998. The share of bonus payments to primary care physicians declined throughout the decade, but the share for primary care services increased.

Volume responses to exogenous changes in Medicare's payment policies.

The purpose of this study is to obtain estimates of the "volume offset," which is the slippage in the costs or the savings that would, in the absence of behavioral responses, result from exogenous changes in Medicare's payment policies. An estimate of this offset is essential to accurate cost estimation for fee proposals under Medicare. Estimates are obtained using Medicare claims data from Colorado for 1976 and 1978, before and after implementation of an abrupt and substantial change in the way Medicare's fees were determined. Reliable estimates could be obtained only for two specialty groups-general practitioners and internists. For these physicians, the results indicate that about half of an initial drop in their Medicare receipts caused by a change in payment policy would be offset by an increase in their volume of services. For physicians whose receipts would increase because of the policy change, the best estimates indicate that about a third of their initial gain would be offset by a fall in the volume of services they provide. The difference in response between gaining and losing practices is not a statistically significant one, however. One could conclude from this study that--for both gaining and losing practices--changes in volume would offset about half of any initial change in receipts caused by a payment change.

How the physician fee schedule affects Medicare patients' out-of-pocket spending.

Simulations of the redistributive effects of the new Medicare fee schedule have focused primarily on physicians, but patients may also be affected. Using a national sample of Medicare patients, we studied the fee schedule's potential impact on both components of out-of-pocket spending: copayments and balance bill amounts. While the fee schedule would raise copayments for the average patient, this effect would be more than offset by the balance billing limits (also imposed by Congress). Nevertheless, almost 10% of patients, particularly those who are black or living in rural areas, would experience large increases in their liability. Finally, the fee schedule with balance billing limits also serves as a "catastrophic coverage" program; patients with extraordinarily high medical expenses would enjoy substantial reductions in their out-of-pocket payments.