Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient-reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi-centered study.

BACKGROUND: Existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown. METHODS: This was a multi-center, cross-sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred. RESULTS: A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms' current state was best reflected by a 1-month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four- and five-item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five-item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four-item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred. CONCLUSION: Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1-month period and use a four- or five-item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.

Industry Payments to Plastic Surgeons, 2013 to 2018: Who's Getting Paid?

BACKGROUND: The Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2010 mandated that all industry payments to physicians be publicly disclosed. To date, industry support of plastic surgeons has not been longitudinally characterized. The authors seek to evaluate payment trends from 2013 to 2018 and characteristics across plastic surgeon recipients of industry payments. METHODS: The authors cross-referenced those in the 2019 American Society of Plastic Surgeons member database with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database physician profile identification number indicating industry funds received within the study period. We categorized surgeons by years since American Board of Plastic Surgery certification, practice region, and academic affiliation. RESULTS: A sum of $89,436,100 (247,614 payments) was received by 3855 plastic surgeons. The top 1 percent of earners (n = 39) by dollar amount received 52 percent of industry dollars to plastic surgeons; of these, nine (23 percent) were academic. Overall, 428 surgeons (11 percent) were academic and received comparable dollar amounts from industry as their nonacademic counterparts. Neither geographic location nor years of experience were independent predictors of payments received. The majority of individual transactions were for food and beverage, whereas the majority of industry dollars were typically for royalties or license. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of all industry dollars transferred went to just 1 percent of American Society of Plastic Surgeons members receiving payments between 2013 and 2018. Considerable heterogeneity exists when accounting for payment subcategories.

Gender Disparity in 2013-2018 Industry Payments to Plastic Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The gender pay gap in medicine has been under intense scrutiny in recent years; female plastic surgeons reportedly earn 11% less than their male peers. "Hidden" pay in the form of industry-based transfers exposes compensation disparity not captured by traditional wage-gap estimations. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to reveal the sex distribution of industry payments to board-certified plastic surgeons across all years covered by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payment Database (CMS OPD). METHODS: We obtained the National Provider Identifier (NPI) for each surgeon in the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) member directory to record gender. Next, "General Payments" data points from annual files for all years present in the CMS OPD, 2013 to 2018, were aggregated and joined to provider details by Physician Profile ID before quantitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of 4840 ASPS surgeons, 3864 (79.8%) reporting ≥1 industry payment were included with 3220 male (83.3%) and 644 female (16.7%). Over 2013 to 2018, females received mean [standard deviation] 56.01 [2.51] payments totaling $11,530.67 [$1461.45] each vs 65.70 [1.80] payments totaling $25,469.05 [$5412.60] for males. The yearly ratio of male-to-female payments in dollars was 2.36 in 2013, 2.69 in 2014, 2.53 in 2015, 2.31 in 2016, 1.72 in 2017, and most recently 1.96 in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Individual male plastic surgeons received over twice the payment dollars given to their female counterparts, accepting both more frequent and higher-value transfers from industry partners. Payment inequity slightly declined in recent years, which may indicate shifting industry engagement gender preferences.