Multi-Institutional Analysis of Insurance Denial Patterns Within Rhinology.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining insurance approval is a necessary component of healthcare in the United States and denials of these claims have been estimated to result in a loss of 3% to 5% of revenue. OBJECTIVE: Examine the trends in insurance denials for rhinological procedures. METHODS: A retrospective review of deidentified financial data of patients who were treated by participating physicians across 3 institutions from January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2023. The data was queried for rhinological and non-rhinological procedures via CPT codes. Cumulative insurance denials were calculated and stratified by procedure and insurance type. Write-offs were dollar amounts associated with final denials. RESULTS: A sample of 102,984 procedures and visits revealed a final denial rate between 2.2% and 2.9% across institutions (p = .72). The top three rhinological procedures for final write-offs were: nasal endoscopy (16.24%, $111,836.87), nasal debridement or polypectomy (6.48%, $79,457.51), and destruction of intranasal lesion (2.11%, $56,932.20). The write-off percentage for each procedure was highest among commercial insurance payers as opposed to Medicare or Medicaid. CONCLUSION: Final denial rates of rhinology procedures ranged between 2% and 3%. Common procedures such as nasal endoscopy and nasal debridement are among the highest written-off procedures. Insurance denials can lead to notable revenue loss. Rhinology practices must continue to remain knowledgeable of the changes and effects of insurance reimbursement on their practice.

Cost Analysis of High-Signal Approach in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Residency.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to analyze a high-signal approach for otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) residency applicants and calculate cost savings for programs and applicants. METHODS: Data from both the 2022-2024 Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and a data model were used to demonstrate cost savings with a high-signal approach. Modeled data assumed that the number of applications per applicant would be equal to the number of signals allowed. Predicted and real-world cost savings across the five other specialties participating in a high-signal approach were calculated. RESULTS: ERAS data cost savings for the entire OHNS applicant pool amounted to $365,950. In the modeled data, cost savings amounted to $825,921. When extrapolated to include all five high-signal specialties, total cost savings amounted to $2,570,464 (ERAS data) and $6,359,478 (modeled data). Otolaryngology programs were predicted to experience significant time savings, resulting in cost savings of $437,883 and $1,113,342 for ERAS data and modeled data, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the advantages of a high-signal approach, including financial advantages or increased time for programs to engage in holistic review and diversify the pool of interview candidates. Cost savings in this study were shown to be significant when extrapolated across all specialties using a high-signal approach. Further research is needed to optimize the signaling system and confirm the favorable interview distribution and equity data from the low-signal OHNS experience with a high-signal approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:2684-2688, 2024.

Access to Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss Care at Private Equity-Owned Otolaryngology Clinics.

OBJECTIVE: Characterizing access to sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) care at private practice otolaryngology clinics of varying ownership models. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional prospective review. SETTING: Private practice otolaryngology clinics. METHODS: We employed a Secret Shopper study design with private equity (PE) owned and non-PE-owned clinics within 15 miles of one another. Using a standardized script, researchers randomly called 50% of each clinic type between October 2021 and January 2022 requesting an appointment on behalf of a family member enrolled in either Medicaid or private insurance (PI) experiencing SSNHL. Access to timely care was assessed between clinic ownership and insurance type. RESULTS: Seventy-eight total PE-owned otolaryngology clinics were identified across the United States. Only 40 non-PE clinics could be matched to the PE clinics; 39 PE and 28 non-PE clinics were called as Medicaid patients; 39 PE and 25 non-PE clinics were called as PI patients; 48.7% of PE and 28.6% of non-PE clinics accepted Medicaid. The mean wait time to new appointment ranged between 9.55 and 13.21 days for all insurance and ownership types but did not vary significantly (P > .480). Telehealth was significantly more likely to be offered for new Medicaid patients at non-PE clinics compared to PE clinics (31.8% vs 0.0%, P = .001). The mean cost for an appointment was significantly greater at PE clinics than at non-PE clinics ($291.18 vs $203.75, P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Patients seeking SSNHL care at PE-owned otolaryngology clinics are likely to face long wait times prior to obtaining an initial appointment and reduced telehealth options.

Otolaryngologists Trail Other Specialties in Industry Payments From Dermal Filler Companies.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Dermal filler (DF) is a widely used nonsurgical option for facial rejuvenation with a rapidly expanding market. Physician payments by DF industry leaders have yet to be characterized. We sought to investigate trends in physician-industry payments by DF companies over 6 years. Differences in payments based on physician specialty and time were characterized. STUDY DESIGN: Database review. METHODS: The Open Payments Database was queried from 2013 to 2018. Payments made by the three largest DF companies by market share to otolaryngologists, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists were analyzed. Total dollars paid, number of payments made, type of payments made, and total number of specialists paid were recorded. One-way ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Otolaryngologists, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists received average annual payments of $0.36 million, $6.3 million, and $6.6 million respectively (P < .001). An average of 330 otolaryngologists, 2,128 plastic surgeons, and 5,980 dermatologists were paid annually (P < .001). Accredited speaking arrangements, consulting fees, and royalty/licensing fees comprised the majority of dollars paid to physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Average physician payment by DF companies exceeds $12 million annually, with otolaryngologists receiving significantly less compared to plastic surgeons and dermatologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 132:301-306, 2022.

Billing patterns for in-office computerized tomography scans of the face/sinus by otolaryngologists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate billing trends, Medicare reimbursement, and practice setting for Medicare-billing otolaryngologists (ORLs) performing in-office face computerized tomography (CT) scans. METHODS: This retrospective study included data on Medicare-billing ORLs from Medicare Part B: Provider Utilization and Payment Datafiles (2012-2018). Number of Medicare-billing ORLs performing in-office CT scans, and total sums and medians for Medicare reimbursements, services performed, and number of patients were gathered along with geographic and practice-type distributions. RESULTS: In 2018, roughly 1 in 7 Medicare-billing ORLs was performing in-office CT scans, an increase from 1 in 10 in 2012 (48.2% growth). From 2012 to 2018, there has been near-linear growth in number of in-office CT scans performed (58.2% growth), and number of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients receiving an in-office CT scan (64.8% growth). However, at the median, the number of in-office CT scans performed and number of Medicare FFS patients receiving an in-office CT, per physician, has remained constant, despite a decline of 42.3% (2012: $227.67; 2018: $131.26) in median Medicare reimbursements. CONCLUSION: Though sharp declines have been seen in Medicare reimbursement, a greater proportion of Medicare-billing ORLs have been performing in-office face CT scans, while median number of in-office CT scans per ORL has remained constant. Although further investigation is certainly warranted, this analysis suggests that ORLs, at least in the case of the Medicare FFS population, are utilizing in-office CT imaging for preoperative planning, pathologic diagnosis, and patient convenience, rather than increased revenue streams. Future studies should focus on observing these billing trends among private insurers.

Role and Growth of Independent Medicare-Billing Otolaryngologic Advanced Practice Providers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role and growth of independently billing otolaryngology (ORL) advanced practice providers (APPs) within a Medicare population. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Data Files, 2012-2017. METHODS: This retrospective review included data and analysis of independent Medicare-billing ORL APPs. Total sums and medians were gathered for Medicare reimbursements, services performed, number of patients, and unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes used, along with geographic and sex distributions. RESULTS: There has been near-linear growth in number of ORL APPs (13.7% to 18.4% growth per year), with a 115.4% growth from 2012 to 2017. Similarly, total Medicare-allowed reimbursement (2012: $15,568,850; 2017: $35,548,446.8), total number of services performed (2012: 313,676; 2017: 693,693.7), and total number of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients (2012: 108,667; 2017: 238,506) increased. Medians of per APP number of unique CPT codes used, Medicare-allowed reimbursement, number of services performed, and number of Medicare FFS patients have remained constant. There were consistently more female APPs than male APPs (female APP proportion range: 71.3%-76.7%). Compared to ORL physicians, there was a significantly greater proportion of APPs practicing in a rural setting as opposed to urban settings (2017: APP proportion 13.6% vs ORL proportion 8.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although their scope of practice has remained constant, independently billing ORL APPs are rapidly increasing in number, which has led to increased Medicare reimbursements, services, and patients. ORL APPs tend to be female and are used more heavily in regions with fewer ORL physicians.

Markup on Services Provided to Medicare Beneficiaries by Otolaryngologists in 2017: Implications for Surprise Billing.

The degree of markup between provider charges and Medicare prices reflects the potential balance bill for out-of-network commercially insured patients. Using publicly available Medicare data, we performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of markup ratios (MRs; ie, the ratio of submitted charges to Medicare-allowed prices) for services commonly performed by otolaryngologists in 2017. Median MRs were as follows: 2.9 (interquartile range, 2.0-4.3) in facility settings (eg, hospital) and 2.1 (interquartile range, 1.7-2.9) in nonfacility settings (eg, physician office). Among the 10 highest-markup procedures performed by otolaryngologists in facility and nonfacility settings, there was no consistent increase in median MRs between 2012 and 2017 (compound annual growth rates, -4.6% for labyrinthotomy to 24.6% for ultrasound-guided biopsy). Median MRs for these procedures were not consistently lower in states with surprise billing protection laws. These findings may reflect the comparatively low potential to "balance bill" patients for elective otolaryngologic services and the limitations of state-level protections against surprise billing.

Patient Use of Low-cost Digital Videoscopes and Smartphones for Remote Ear and Oropharyngeal Examinations.

Importance: During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, telehealth has become a vital component of health care delivery. For otolaryngology evaluations, examination of the ear and oropharynx is important but difficult to achieve remotely. Objective: To assess the feasibility of patient use of low-cost digital videoscopes and smartphones for examination of the ear and oropharynx. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective quality improvement study was conducted in an academic adult otolaryngology clinic including 23 patients who presented for an in-person appointment and owned a smartphone device. The study was conducted from July 1 to 15, 2020. Interventions: Participants were asked to capture pictures and videos of their ear canals and oropharynx with digital videoscopes and their smartphones under real-time guidance over a telehealth platform. They were then surveyed about their experience. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were ratings by health care clinicians and a blinded otolaryngologist reviewer of image acceptability. Secondary outcomes included participant time to image acquisition and willingness to purchase digital videoscopes for telehealth use. Results: Of the 23 participants included, 14 were women (61%); mean age was 50 years (range, 21 to 80 years). Of the images obtained using the digital otoscope ear examination, 95% were considered acceptable by the health care clinicians and 91% were considered acceptable by the blinded reviewer; 16 participants (70%) reported that the otoscope was easy to use. The mean time to acquire images for both ears was 114 seconds (95% CI, 84-145 seconds). Twenty-one participants (91%) were willing to pay for a digital otoscope for telehealth use. For the oropharyngeal examination, a greater proportion of smartphone video examinations were considered acceptable by clinicians (63% acceptability) and the blinded reviewer (55%) compared with the digital endoscope (clinicians, 40%; blinded reviewer, 14%). The mean time required for the oropharyngeal examination smartphone video capture was shorter at 35 seconds compared with both the digital endoscope (difference, -27 seconds; 95% CI, -7 to -47 seconds) and smartphone photo capture (difference, -53 seconds; 95% CI, -20 to -87 seconds). Conclusions and Relevance: Digital otoscopes and smartphones apparently can facilitate remote head and neck physical examination in telehealth. Digital otoscopes were useful for ear examinations, and smartphone videos appeared to be the most useful for oropharyngeal examinations. Further studies are required to determine specific diagnostic capabilities in various telehealth practice settings.

Compensation Rates for Otolaryngologic Procedures Under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule in 2018.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: Medicare reimbursement for physician work depends on the estimated time and intensity - which encompasses technical skill, cognitive load, and stress - required to perform services. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) quantitatively expresses intensity estimates as compensation rates per unit time. This study aimed to characterize compensation rates under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) for operative procedures commonly performed by otolaryngologists. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of fiscal year 2018 PFS specifications and publicly available Medicare Part B utilization data for the top 100 highest-volume procedures furnished by otolaryngologists to Medicare beneficiaries in inpatient and ambulatory surgical center (ASC) settings between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Co-primary outcomes were the estimated 1) total compensation rate ($/min) and 2) intraservice (i.e., "skin-to-skin" time) compensation rate ($/min) for each included procedure. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 147 unique procedure types (settings non-mutually exclusive): 82 inpatient procedure types (n = 33,907 procedures) and 95 ASC procedure types (n = 34,765 procedures). In the inpatient setting, median total compensation rate and intraservice compensation rates were $1.50/min (interquartile range [IQR]: $1.19/min-$1.65/min) and $2.27/min (IQR: $1.69/min-$2.68/min), respectively. In the ASC setting, median total compensation rate and intraservice compensation rates were $1.48/min (interquartile range [IQR]: $1.27/min-$1.77/min) and $2.39/min (IQR: $1.82/min-$2.91/min), respectively. At the service line level, volume-weighted total (inpatient: $1.91/min, ASC: $1.90/min) and intraservice (inpatient: $3.84/min, ASC: $3.37/min) compensation rates were highest for rhinologic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation rates under the Medicare PFS varied widely for operative procedures commonly performed by otolaryngologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:E1785-E1791, 2021.

Systematic Review of Telehealth Cost Minimization for Patients and Health Systems in Otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in telehealth becoming commonplace in many health care fields. Telehealth benefits include improving access, decreasing costs, and elevating patient's experience. A review of cost minimization (CM) analyses was performed in order to explore scientific studies associated with integrating tele-otolaryngology in clinical practice. Our primary objective was to evaluate published literature for cost related to the implementation of telemedicine across otolaryngology, and to determine CM when compared to in-person visits. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Literature Review. METHODS: We performed a systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane in May 2020, to identify studies with a cost analysis of tele-otolaryngology care. Inclusion criteria focused on articles citing CM data from telehealth services. Literature quality was assessed using the MINORS scoring system. RESULTS: From 380 original articles screened only nine evaluated cost in otolaryngology. CM in the US ranged from $68 to $900 per visit. Cost was evaluated in general otolaryngology, sleep medicine, otology, and head and neck cancer surgery, the latter had the most benefit. The most common types of telehealth visits were routine follow-up and screening. Data were insufficient for meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine has been trialed across various otolaryngology subspecialties; its incorporation is projected to have a meaningful impact on access to specialty care. This research suggests that the delivery of virtual care reduces cost with the potential of increasing net revenue across multiple otolaryngology subspecialties. Further studies are needed to better discern the entirety of cost savings and the best settings for integration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:1741-1748, 2021.

A Century in Review: Medicolegal Implications of Facial Nerve Paralysis.

Importance: It is important to recognize factors that may mitigate the risk of a potential lawsuit and increase knowledge and awareness of physicians. Objective: To evaluate and characterize facial nerve paralysis litigation claims and related potential causes. Design, Setting, and Participants: These data were extracted from the two main computerized legal databases: WestLaw and LexisNexis. The data were queried on April 2, 2020. The records from 1919 to 2020 were obtained from a population-based setting. A total of 186 cases were included. Data were gathered for all alleged cases of facial nerve paralysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: There was a continuous rise in the amount of malpractice payments with the highest mean amount being in the past decade. Results: From 1919 to 2020, a total of 186 malpractice cases for facial nerve damage were identified. A total amount of $89,178,857.99 was rewarded to plaintiffs in 66 cases. The mean amount of paid malpractice claim was $1,351,194.80. Improper performance/treatment was the most common reason for alleged litigation (n = 97). This was followed by misdiagnosis/delayed diagnosis (n = 47), and failure of informed consent (n = 34). The highest number of malpractice claims with a total of 53 cases was from 1991 to 2000. The highest mean amount per payment was in the past decade (2011-2020) with a mean of $3,841,052.68. Conclusions and Relevance: Over the past century, improper performance/procedure, delayed/misdiagnosis, and failure of informed consent were the most common reasons for litigations related to facial nerve paralysis.

Otorhinolaryngology litigation in England: 727 clinical negligence cases against the National Health Service.

INTRODUCTION: Litigation against the National Health Service (NHS) in England is rising. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and characteristics of otorhinolaryngology clinical negligence claims in England. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all clinical negligence claims in England held by NHS Resolution relating to otorhinolaryngology between April 2013 and April 2018. Analysis was performed using information for cause, patient injury and claim cost. Where claim information was adequately detailed, the authors categorised claims by subspecialty, diagnosis and surgery. RESULTS: A total number of 727 claims were identified with an estimated potential cost of £108 million. Out of these, 463 were closed claims. Including open claim reserves, the mean cost of a claim was £148 923. Head and neck surgery was the subspecialty with the highest number of claims (n = 313, 43%) and highest cost (£51.5 million) followed by otology (n = 171, £24.5 million) and rhinology (n = 171, £13.6 million). Over half of claims were associated with an operation (n = 429, 59%) where mastoid surgery (n = 46) and endoscopic sinus surgery (n = 46) were equally associated with the greatest number of claims. The most frequent causes for clinical negligence claims included failure or delay to diagnose (n = 178, 25%), failure or delay to treat (n = 136, 19%), intra-operative complications (n = 130, 18%) and failure of the consent process (n = 107, 15%). DISCUSSION: Clinical negligence claims in otorhinolaryngology are related to several different components of patient management and are not limited to postoperative complications. This study highlights the importance of robust pathways in out-patient diagnostics and the consenting process in order to deliver better patient care and reduce the impact of litigation. Keywords informed consent, malpractice, clinical negligence claims, litigation, otolaryngology.

Comprehensive Community Screening of Otological Patients by Trained Technicians Using a Telemedicine Device: An Efficient and Cost-Effective Way to Triage Patients With Ear Diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To emphasize the benefits of tele-otology in community screening of patients with ear diseases. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients screened and treated under the Shruti tele-otology program between 2013 and 2019 was conducted. It involved screening, diagnosis, medical management, surgical intervention, and rehabilitation using hearing aid. The study focused on underprivileged and underserved community of rural and urban slums across 12 states of India. The study was conducted using a telemedicine device called ENTraview, that is, a camera-enabled android phone integrated with an otoscope and audiometry screening. RESULT: A total of 810 746 people were screened, and incidence of various ear diseases was recorded. Ear problems were found in 265 615 (33%) patients, of which 151 067 (57%) had impacted wax, 46 792(18%) had chronic suppurative otitis media, 27 875 (10%) had diminished hearing, 12 729 (5%) had acute otitis media and acute suppurative otitis media (ASOM), and 27 152 (10%) had problems of foreign body, otomycosis, and so on. Of the total 265 615 referred patients, 20 986 (8%) reported for treatment and received treatment at a significantly reduced cost through Shruti program partners. The conversion rate of nonsurgical and surgical procedure was also compared, and it was found that, while 9% of the patients opted for nonsurgical treatment, only 3% opted for surgery in the intervention group giving a significant P value of .00001. CONCLUSION: The potential for telemedicine to reduce inequalities in health care is immense but remains underutilized. Shruti has largely been able to bridge this gap as it is an innovative, fast, and effective programs that address the ear ailment in the community.

CARES Act Provider Relief Fund Aid to Otolaryngologists in Small Practices.

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented financial strain on otolaryngologists. Otolaryngologists employed by small practices may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of ongoing losses because these organizations often have limited financial reserves. We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of federal direct aid provided to small practices (defined as ≤15 clinicians) employing otolaryngologists, using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Compare National Downloadable File and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Provider Relief Fund database. As of June 18, 2020, the HHS had allocated nearly $80 million to 966 (88.9%) of 1087 small practices employing 2455 otolaryngologists. The median amount of aid per clinician was $7909 (interquartile range, $4409-$12,710). These findings suggest that the majority of small practices have received direct aid through the HHS Provider Relief Fund, but aid amounts have thus far been modest relative to the fixed costs of practice.

Time is Money: Relative Value Units and Operative Time in Otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVES: Physician compensation for procedures is typically rooted in the work relative value unit (wRVU) system. Operative time is one of the factors that goes into the determination of wRVU assignment. There should be consistency between the wRVU/hr rate, irrespective of average operative time required to perform certain procedures. We investigate if wRVU assignment for otolaryngology procedures adequately accounts for increased operative time. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a surgical database. METHODS: NSQIP was queried from 2015-2018 for the top 50 most frequently performed otolaryngology Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes completed as standalone procedures. Median operative time was determined for each CPT code, and wRVU/hr was calculated. Correlations between operative time, wRVU, and wRVU/hr were investigated using linear regression analysis. A secondary analysis using complication rate as an indicator for procedure complexity was performed to examine the relation between wRVUs and complication rates. RESULTS: Fifty CPT codes containing 64,084 patients where only one code was reported were included in this analysis. The median operative time was 84 minutes, median wRVU was 11.23, and median wRVU/hour was 7.96. Linear regression analysis demonstrated a strong positive correlation between operative time and wRVU assignment (R2 = 0.805, P < .001). Further analysis found no correlation between operative time and wRVU/hr (R2 = 0.008, P = .525). Linear regression of wRVU/hr and complication rate showed a statistically significant positive correlation (R2 = 0.113, P = .017). CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that compensation for otolaryngology procedures is positively correlated with operative time. Surgeries where more than one code is reported could not be evaluated, thus excluding some common combination of procedures performed by otolaryngologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:E395-E400, 2021.

Gender-Based Pay Discrimination in Otolaryngology.

Male and female otolaryngologists all attend the same accredited medical schools, complete the same accredited residency programs, and take the same board certification exams; however, female otolaryngologist are paid 77 cents on the dollar compared to their male colleagues. Even after accounting for age, experience, faculty rank, research productivity, and clinical revenue, significant gender pay gaps exist across all professor levels. The goal of this review is to improve our understanding of how and why the gender pay gap and discrimination exists, the harm caused by tolerance of policies that perpetuate gender pay inequity, and what is and can be done to correct gender-based pay gaps and discrimination. The review presents the current status of gender pay inequity in the United States and reports on how otolaryngology compares to other professions both within and outside of healthcare. The gender pay gap is shown to have a negative impact on economic growth, institutional reputation and financial success, retention and recruitment of faculty, and patient care. Many historically incorrect reasons used to explain the causes of the gender pay gap, including that women work less, have less research productivity, or produce lower-quality care, have been be disproved by evaluation of current research. Potential causes of gender pay inequities, such as gender bias, organization culture, fear of retaliation, promotions inequalities, lack of transparency, and senior leadership not being held accountable for equity and diversity concerns, will be explored. Finally, examples of best practices to achieve pay equity will be presented. Laryngoscope, 131:989-995, 2021.

Financial Transactions from Manufacturers to Otolaryngologists in 2018.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize in depth non-research and research payments from industry to otolaryngologists in 2018 with an emphasis on product types. METHODS: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments program was used for data collection: payment amount, the nature of payments, products associated with the payments, date of the payments, and companies making the payments were studied. Products associated with the payments were classified by categorical type. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: There were 70,172 payments for a total of $11,001,875 made to otolaryngologists in 2018 with a median payment of $19. Food and beverage had the highest number of payments made (89.96%). Consulting fees (33.46%) composed the highest total payment amount. The two companies that contributed the highest amount were Stryker Corporation and Intersect ENT Inc. Sinus conditions had the most products within the top 25 products associated with payments. The top five products with the highest payments received were for balloon sinus dilation, nasal spray, sinus implant, Botox, and cochlear implant. There was a bimodal payment distribution demonstrating a higher number of payments made in the spring and fall. CONCLUSION: Our study is the first to review payments to otolaryngologists in 2018 and classify these payments into product types. The products and companies that contributed the highest payments were associated with sinus conditions. The products that dominated in each subspecialty of otolaryngology coincide with clinical practice trends and emerging technologies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:E388-E394, 2021.