Rising Prices and Lower Medicare Reimbursement Rates Create Outrage Among Clinicians.

In a recent Hot Topics article, reimbursement rates for Medicare physicians are discussed, and how it will impact their practice.

Rising Prices and Lower Medicare Reimbursement Rates Create Outrage Among Clinicians.

In a recent Hot Topics article, reimbursement rates for Medicare physicians are discussed, and how it will impact their practice.

State Coverage and Reimbursement of Antiobesity Medications in Medicaid.

This study examines state Medicaid coverage policies for antiobesity medications and their trends in Medicaid reimbursement from 2011 to 2022.

Impact of Systemic Delays for Patient Access to Oncology Drugs on Clinical, Economic, and Quality of Life Outcomes in Canada: A Call to Action.

Canada has one of the most complex and rigorous drug approval and public reimbursement processes and is, unfortunately, one of the countries with the longest delays in drug access. To assess the overall impact of systemic delays in access to cancer therapy, a targeted literature review (TLR) was performed to identify studies associated with the clinical, economic, and quality of life impacts of delayed access to oncology drugs. Using MEDLINE/PubMed databases and snowballing, four unique records met the eligibility criteria. Results revealed that clinical outcomes were the most impacted by systemic delays in access to oncology drugs (e.g., life years lost, overall survival, and progression-free survival). The four articles retrieved by the TLR specifically illustrated that a substantial number of life years could potentially be saved by increasing systemic efficiency regarding the development, approval, and reimbursement processes of new drugs for advanced malignancies. It is imperative that initiatives are put in place to improve the performance and speed of Canadian drug regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) processes, especially for new cancer therapeutics. The proposed solutions in this paper include better coordination between HTA and Canadian payers to harmonize coverage decisions, international collaborations, information sharing, and national standards for timeliness in oncology drug access.

Trends in Medicare Reimbursements for Commonly Performed Laryngeal Procedures from 2000 to 2021.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies among different specialties have suggested that inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursements have steadily declined in the last few decades. The objective of this study is to investigate whether this is true within the field of laryngology. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study. SETTING: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Fee Schedule. METHODS: 2000-2021 fees for laryngeal surgeries (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] codes 31530, 31531, 31535, 31536, 31540, 31541, 31545, 31546, 31551-31554, 31560, 31561, 31570), and laryngectomies (CPTs 31360, 31365, 31367, 31368, 31370, 31375, 31380, 31382, 31390, 31395) were gathered. United States consumer price index (CPI) was used to adjust all gathered data for inflation to 2021 US dollars. RESULTS: During the study period, unadjusted reimbursement for non-facility and facility laryngeal surgeries decreased an average of 6.1% and 6.6%, respectively. When adjusting for inflation, non-facility and facility laryngeal surgeries saw an average decrease of 17.8% (p < 0.001) and 28.5% (p < 0.001), respectively. Unadjusted reimbursement for facility laryngectomies saw an average increase of 40.2%, correlating to an inflation-adjusted decline of 8.9% (p < 0.001). Among laryngeal procedures overall, there was an average nominal increase of 17.0%, correlating to a 20.3% inflation-adjusted decline. CONCLUSION: In terms of inflation-adjusted dollars, reimbursements for laryngeal procedures have seen a large decrease in the last two decades. Understanding reimbursement trends is critical for sustainability of otolaryngology practices, and can be used by surgeons, hospital systems, and policymakers to guide future healthcare legislation.

Trends of Medicare reimbursement rates for gender affirmation procedures.

BACKGROUND: While nearly 1 in 5 Americans receives health insurance coverage through Medicare, literature suggests that Medicare reimbursement is lagging behind inflation for many plastic surgery procedures. AIM: This article evaluates trends in Medicare reimbursement for gender affirmation procedures. METHODS: The most common gender affirmation procedures performed at an urban academic medical center were identified in this cross-sectional study (level 4 evidence). Five nongender surgery codes were evaluated for reference. A standardized formula utilizing relative value units (RVUs) was used to calculate monetary data. Differences in reimbursement between 2014 and 2021 were calculated for each procedure. OUTCOME: The main outcome was inflation-adjusted difference of charges from 2014 to 2021. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2021, Medicare reimbursement for gender affirmation procedures had an inflation-unadjusted average change of -0.09% (vs +5.63% for the selected nongender codes) and an inflation-adjusted change of -10.03% (vs -5.54% for the selected nongender codes). Trends in reimbursement varied by category of gender-affirming procedure. The overall average compound annual growth rate had a change of -0.99% (vs -0.53% for the selected nongender codes). The average changes in work, facility, and malpractice RVUs were -1.05%, +9.52%, and -0.93%, respectively. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Gender surgeons and patients should be aware that the decrease in reimbursement may affect access to gender-affirming care. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Our study is one of the first evaluating the reimbursement rates associated with the full spectrum of gender affirmation surgery. However, our study is limited by its cross-sectional nature. CONCLUSIONS: From 2014 to 2021, Medicare reimbursement for gender affirmation procedures lagged inflation.

Medicare Reimbursement in Hand and Upper Extremity Procedures: A 20-Year Analysis.

PURPOSE: Concern exists that Medicare physician fees for procedures have decreased over the past 20 years. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is set to re-evaluate these physician fees in the near future for concern that these procedures are overvalued. Our study sought to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2019 for the top 20 most billed hand and upper extremity surgical procedures at our institution. METHODS: The financial database of a single academic tertiary care center was queried to identify the Current Procedural Terminology codes most frequently utilized in orthopedic hand and upper extremity procedures in 2019. The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the CMS was queried for annual physician fee data. Monetary data were adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index of Urban Research Series (CPI-U-RS) and expressed in 2019 constant US dollars (USD). The average annual and total percent change in reimbursement were calculated via linear regression for all procedures (P < .05). RESULTS: Accounting for inflation, the total average physician reimbursement decreased by 20.9% from 2000 to 2019, with 12 of 20 codes decreasing by more than 20%. The greatest decrease pertained to arthrodesis of the wrist at 33.9%. Upon linear regression, all procedures were found to decrease annually, with arthrodesis of the wrist decreasing by an average of 2.3% annually over this period. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 2 decades, physician reimbursement for hand and upper extremity procedures has significantly decreased.

Reimbursement to Pharmacies for Generic Drugs by Medicare Part D Sponsors.

This study evaluates whether organizations that offer Medicare Part D plans (referred to as Part D sponsors) overpay pharmacies for generic drugs.

A cost comparison of benralizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab in patients with severe asthma: A US third-party payer perspective.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials and real-world evidence (RWE) studies of biologics have demonstrated reduced exacerbations, decreased use of oral corticosteroids (OCS), and improvements in daily symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA). OBJECTIVE: To compare direct health care costs associated with biologic use for the treatment of SEA from a US third-party payer perspective. METHODS: We developed a cost-minimization model to compare costs and cost offsets associated with 3 biologics-benralizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab-for 2- and 4-year periods. The model relied on longitudinal data from clinical trials to inform the primary (base case) analysis cost comparison and RWE study data, in a separate scenario, to compare costs in nonclinical trial settings. Primary model outcomes included exacerbations (including hospitalizations), OCS-dependent years (including associated complications), and total direct health care biologic costs. Results were calculated at the per patient and population level (per 1,000 patients). Sensitivity analyses with key model parameters were performed. RESULTS: Benralizumab had the lowest total biologic costs per patient for both the 2- and 4-year periods. Over 4 years, the marginal cost difference in total biologic costs per patient was $23,061 lower for benralizumab vs mepolizumab and $17,242 lower for benralizumab vs dupilumab. The 4-year population level analysis of benralizumab vs mepolizumab revealed $4.8 million in marginal cost offsets due to 582 fewer exacerbations and 153 fewer OCS-dependent years and a marginal total cost savings of $27.9 million per 1,000 patients for benralizumab. The 4-year population level analysis of benralizumab vs dupilumab revealed $2.3 million in marginal cost offsets due to 291 fewer exacerbations and 64 fewer OCS-dependent years and marginal total cost savings of $19.5 million per 1,000 patients for benralizumab. RWE data were available for a 2-year cost comparison scenario of benralizumab vs mepolizumab, which showed similar results to the base case analysis. Sensitivity analyses varying assumptions on key model parameter estimates confirmed results, with benralizumab having lower total direct health care costs in all scenarios tested, and showed that model results were most sensitive to changes in biologic costs and exacerbation reduction rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving benralizumab had higher nonbiologic cost offsets because of reductions in exacerbations and OCS-dependent years, leading to greater cost savings for third-party payers compared with patients receiving mepolizumab or dupilumab. Taken together with biologic costs, benralizumab presents greater savings in health care costs for payers than patients with SEA who use mepolizumab or dupilumab. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by AstraZeneca (Cambridge, UK). Drs Xu, Chung, Genofre, and Katial are or were AstraZeneca employees at the time this research was conducted and may be shareholders of AstraZeneca. Ms Schaefer and Dr Szende are employees of Labcorp Drug Development, which received funding from AstraZeneca to perform this research.

Cost and regression analysis of preeclampsia from the perspective of the reimbursement agency / Análisis de costes y regresión de la preeclampsia desde la perspectiva de la agencia de reembolso

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the financial burden of preeclampsia (PE) from a single institution's perspective and then determine the cost of the illness from the reimbursement institution perspective and finally draw a regression model that predicts the annual cost of a patient. Materials and methods: The research is a descriptive and cross-sectional type of research and a retrospective cost analysis. Patients diagnosed with PE in 2021 were included in the study. For the regression analysis of the study, a dataset with 29 parameters belonging to 65 patients was created. Regression models were built on top of it. Results: In our study, per-patient expenses of PE patients from the perspective of the reimbursement institution were calculated and presented as average costs; severe PE patient with cesarean section 7598.5 Ł ($769.8), severe PE patient with normal vaginal delivery 8487.48 Ł (1050.43 $), mild PE patient with cesarean section 5331.67 Ł ($659.86) and mild PE patient with normal vaginal delivery was calculated as 6220.65 Ł (769.88 $). In the study, different regression formulas were created for the two groups of PE. The created regression model had an R2 score of 91.85%. Conclusion: The actors involved in the management of the disease should determine the cost-effectiveness of the disease by using the financial data of the patients and choose the right approach. Health costs in Turkey differ from the parameters in the European Union economy. Therefore, there are lower health costs. The financial findings of the disease are a guide for health policy makers, health managers and researchers.(AU)

Objetivo: El objetivo de este estudio es determinar la carga financiera de la preeclampsia (PE) desde la perspectiva de una única institución, para luego determinar los costes de la enfermedad desde la perspectiva de la institución de reembolso, y así elaborar un modelo de regresión que prediga el coste anual de un paciente. Materiales y métodos: Se trata de una investigación de tipo descriptivo, transversal y de un análisis retrospectivo de costes. Se incluyeron en el estudio los pacientes diagnosticados de PE en 2021. Para el análisis de regresión del estudio se creó un conjunto de datos con 29 parámetros que pertenecían a 65 pacientes diferentes. Los modelos de regresión se construyeron en base a este. Resultados: En nuestro estudio, los gastos por paciente de las pacientes con PE desde la perspectiva de la institución de reembolso se calcularon y presentaron como costos promedio; paciente con PE grave con cesárea 7598.5 (769.8 $), paciente con PE grave con parto vaginal normal 8487.48 (1050.43 $), paciente con PE leve con cesárea 5331.67 (659.86 $) y paciente con PE leve con parto vaginal normal se calculó como 6220.65 (769.88 $). En el estudio se crearon diferentes fórmulas de regresión para los dos grupos de PE. El modelo de regresión creado tuvo una puntuación R2 de 91,85%. Conclusión: Los agentes implicados en la gestión de la enfermedad tendrán que determinar su rentabilidad utilizando los datos económicos de los pacientes y elegir el enfoque adecuado. Los costes sanitarios en Turquía difieren de los parámetros de la economía de la Unión Europea. Por tanto, los costes sanitarios se reducen. Los hallazgos financieros de la enfermedad servirán de guía para los responsables de las políticas de salud, los gerentes de salud y los investigadores.(AU)

Two Decades of Declining Medicare Reimbursement in Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Given the uncertainty of US health care finances, an understanding of reimbursement trends has become increasingly important in the field of cardiac surgery. We aimed to assess Medicare reimbursement trends for common cardiac surgical procedures from 2000 to 2022. METHODS: Reimbursement data were extracted from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool during the study period for 6 common cardiac operations: aortic valve replacement, mitral valve repair and replacement, tricuspid valve replacement, Bentall procedure, and coronary artery bypass grafting. Reimbursement rates were adjusted for inflation to 2022 US dollars using the Consumer Price Index. Total percentage change and compound annual growth rate were calculated. A split-time analysis was performed to assess trends before and after 2015. Least squares and linear regressions were performed. The R2 value was calculated for each procedure, and slope was used to determine change in reimbursements over time. RESULTS: Inflation-adjusted reimbursement decreased by 34.1% during the study period. The overall compound annual growth rate was -1.8%. Reimbursement trends differed by procedure (P < .001), with all reimbursements trending down (R2 > 0.62), except for mitral valve replacement (P = .21) and tricuspid valve replacement (P = .43). Coronary artery bypass grafting decreased the most (-44.4%), followed by aortic valve replacement (-40.1%), mitral valve repair (-38.5%), mitral valve replacement (-29.8%), Bentall procedure (-28.5%), and tricuspid valve replacement (-25.3%). In split-time analysis, reimbursement rates did not significantly change from 2000 to 2015 (P = .24) but decreased significantly from 2016 to 2022 (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Medicare reimbursement significantly decreased for most cardiac surgical procedures. These trends justify further advocacy by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons to maintain access to quality cardiac surgical care.