Is Collaborative Care the Future of Medicine? Lessons Learned from the Care of Children with Colorectal Conditions.

The treatment of patients with colorectal disorders requires care from a wide variety of medical and surgical specialties over the course of their lifetime. This is ideally handled by a collaborative center which facilitates the assessment and development of patient care among multiple specialties which can enhance the quality and implementation of treatment plans, improve communication among different specialties, decrease morbidity, and improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. This collaborative approach can serve as a model for other parts of medicine requiring a similar multi-disciplinary and integrated method of care delivery. We describe the process, as well as the lessons learned in developing such a program.

Cost Analysis of a Multidisciplinary Vascular Anomaly Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: Multidisciplinary vascular anomaly clinics (VACs) offer important value to pediatric patients with complex vascular anomalies whose care overlaps specialties. These clinics are labor intensive and costly to operate since providers see fewer patients compared to their individual specialty clinic. Our North American tertiary care institution's VAC specialists include a pediatric otolaryngologist, pediatric surgeon, pediatric plastic surgeon, pediatric dermatologist, and interventional radiologist. To assess financial feasibility, we conducted a cost analysis of our VACs comprised of 2 half-day multidisciplinary physician attended clinics (5 specialists at our main campus and 2 specialists at a satellite clinic) and a half-day nurse practitioner clinic. METHOD: Assessment of net revenue based on net collections for clinic, professional, operative, hospital setting, and facility charges generated during 12 consecutive monthly VACs beginning July 1, 2015. Expense calculations included provider and staff salaries, benefits, supply costs, and clinic leasing costs. RESULTS: There were 469 clinic visits, of which 202 were new patient evaluations. Sixty-eight patients underwent 93 procedures under general anesthesia, including procedures performed by our interventional radiologist, most commonly sclerotherapy or embolization (n = 37), surgical interventions including endoscopy (n = 36), or laser procedures (n = 20). Three patients were admitted. Fifty-seven patients received a new diagnosis different from that for which they were referred. Gross revenue was $1 810 525, and net revenue was 42.5%, or $783 152. Expenses totaled $453 415 for a net positive revenue of $329 737. CONCLUSION: When including direct downstream revenue, particularly from operative procedures, our VAC program operates on a net positive margin, making the program financially feasible.

Cost Analysis of a Multidisciplinary Aerodigestive Clinic: Are Such Clinics Financially Feasible?

OBJECTIVE: Multidisciplinary clinics offer important value to pediatric patients with complex conditions that overlap specialties; however, such labor-intensive clinics are difficult to facilitate. We performed a cost analysis of our pediatric multidisciplinary aerodigestive clinic (MADC) to assess its financial feasibility at our tertiary care institution. METHOD: Revenue was based on net collections for clinic, professional, and hospital setting charges generated during 12 consecutive monthly MADCs beginning August 2013. Clinic charges included facility and speech pathologist fees. Professional charges included clinic and operative fees generated by providers and anesthesiologist. Hospital setting fees included facility and material charges for technical procedures. Direct expense calculations included all providers and staff salaries, benefits, and supply costs. RESULTS: Charge capture for 54 consecutive patients seen during the study time included new visits 99203-99205 (n = 63), consults 99243-99245 (n = 60), and follow-up visits 99212-99215 (n = 196). Sixty percent of patients underwent a clinic nasopharyngeal or laryngeal endoscopy (92511 or 31575), and 60% underwent subsequent intraoperative procedures with 1 (n = 8) or 2 to 3 services (n = 24). Program net revenue totaled $828 136 and direct costs $518 867, accounting for a net positive margin of $309 269. CONCLUSIONS: When including direct downstream revenue, our MADC operates on a net positive margin, making it financially feasible.