Surgeon leadership in the coding, billing, and contractual negotiations for fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair increases medical center contribution margin and physician reimbursement.

BACKGROUND: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) allows endovascular treatment of thoracoabdominal and juxtarenal aneurysms previously outside the indications of use for standard devices. However, because of considerable device costs and increased procedure time, FEVAR is thought to result in financial losses for medical centers and physicians. We hypothesized that surgeon leadership in the coding, billing, and contractual negotiations for FEVAR procedures will increase medical center contribution margin (CM) and physician reimbursement. METHODS: At the UMass Memorial Center for Complex Aortic Disease, a vascular surgeon with experience in medical finances is supported to manage the billing and coding of FEVAR procedures for medical center and physician reimbursement. A comprehensive financial analysis was performed for all FEVAR procedures (2011-2015), independent of insurance status, patient presentation, or type of device used. Medical center CM (actual reimbursement minus direct costs) was determined for each index FEVAR procedure and for all related subsequent procedures, inpatient or outpatient, 3 months before and 1 year subsequent to the index FEVAR procedure. Medical center CM for outpatient clinic visits, radiology examinations, vascular laboratory studies, and cardiology and pulmonary evaluations related to FEVAR were also determined. Surgeon reimbursement for index FEVAR procedure, related adjunct procedures, and assistant surgeon reimbursement were also calculated. All financial analyses were performed and adjudicated by the UMass Department of Finance. RESULTS: The index hospitalization for 63 FEVAR procedures incurred $2,776,726 of direct costs and generated $3,027,887 in reimbursement, resulting in a positive CM of $251,160. Subsequent related hospital procedures (n = 26) generated a CM of $144,473. Outpatient clinic visits, radiologic examinations, and vascular laboratory studies generated an additional CM of $96,888. Direct cost analysis revealed that grafts accounted for the largest proportion of costs (55%), followed by supplies (12%), bed (12%), and operating room (10%). Total medical center CM for all FEVAR services was $492,521. Average surgeon reimbursements per FEVAR from 2011 to 2015 increased from $1601 to $2480 while the surgeon payment denial rate declined from 50% to 0%. Surgeon-led negotiations with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services during 2015 resulted in a 27% increase in physician reimbursement for the remainder of 2015 ($2480 vs $3068/case) and a 91% increase in reimbursement from 2011 ($1601 vs $3068). Assistant surgeon reimbursement also increased ($266 vs $764). Concomitant FEVAR-related procedures generated an additional $27,347 in surgeon reimbursement. CONCLUSIONS: Physician leadership in the coding, billing, and contractual negotiations for FEVAR results in a positive medical center CM and increased physician reimbursement.

Fee-paying systems and service patterns in a Hong Kong dental clinic.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe and compare patients' consumption of dental services and dentists' productivity in a university campus clinic before and after changing from a time-based to an item-based fee-paying system. METHOD: Data were collected from the University of Hong Kong dental clinic which serves all university students and staff. A time-based fee-paying system had been in use up to February 1999 when it was switched to an item-based system. Computerised records of all patients in two 1-year periods starting from February 1996 and February 1999 were analysed. RESULTS: The percentages of eligible users who attended the University dental clinic were similar in the two study periods (30% in 96/97 vs 29% in 99/00). However, on average, patients consumed more dental service items in a year after the switch in fee-paying system (3.2 vs 4.1). There was also an increase in the mean number of dental service items provided by a dentist per working week after the change in fee-paying system (71.5 vs 99.4). CONCLUSION: On switching from a time-based to an item-based fee-paying system, dentists in the UHS dental clinic became more productive and the consumption of dental services per patient also increased.

Beneficiary decisionmaking: the impact of labeling health plan choices.

One critical health plan decision concerns choosing an original Medicare plan or a Medicare managed care plan. Evidence suggests that people are confused by the phrase "Original Medicare plan." Using focus group and Q-sort methodology, the authors sought to identify a name for the Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) product. Two key insights were gained. First, participants used the word "Medicare" to name the FFS product. Second, participants did not choose between two plans. Rather, they decided between supplemental insurance and a managed care product. These factors should influence how CMS "brands" not only the FFS product but also the overall Medicare program.

Measuring the "managedness" and covered benefits of health plans.

STUDY AIMS: (1) To develop indexes measuring the degree of managedness and the covered benefits of health insurance plans, (2) to describe the variation in these indexes among plans in one health insurance market, (3) to assess the validity of the health plan indexes, and (4) to examine the association between patient characteristics and the health plan indexes. Measures of the "managedness" and covered benefits of health plans are requisite for studying the effects of managed care on clinical practice and health system performance, and they may improve people's understanding of our complex health care system. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: As part of our larger Physician Referral Study, we collected health insurance information for 189 insurance product lines and 755 products in the Seattle, Washington metropolitan area, which we linked with the study's data for 2,277 patients recruited in local primary care offices. STUDY DESIGN: Managed care and benefit variables were constructed through content analysis of health plan information. Principal component analysis of the variables produced a managedness index, an in-network benefits index, and an out-of-network benefits index. Bivariable analyses examined associations between patient characteristics and the three indexes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: From the managed care variables, we constructed three provider-oriented indexes for the financial, utilization management, and network domains of health plans. From these, we constructed a single managedness index, which correlated as expected with the individual measures, with the domain indexes, with plan type (FFS, PPO, POS, HMO), with independent assessments of local experts, and with patients' attitudes about their health insurance. For benefits, we constructed an in-network benefits index and an out-of-network benefits index, which were correlated with the managedness index. The personal characteristics of study patients were associated with the managed care and benefit indexes. Study patients in more managed plans reported somewhat better health than patients in less managed plans. CONCLUSIONS: Indexes of the managedness and benefits of health plans can be constructed from publicly available information. The managedness and benefit indexes are associated with the personal characteristics and health status of study patients. Potential uses of the managed care and benefits indexes are discussed.

Preferred provider organizations and physician fees.

Preferred provider organizations (PPOs) represent a form of managed care in which providers agree to accept discounted fees in exchange for the expectation that their patient volume will increase or at least be maintained. Managed care plans that rely on discounted fee-for-service (FFS) payments have increased from about 10 plans in 1981 to over 700 plans in 1994. In this study, we document levels of discounts achieved by two large national insurers and discuss how the size of the discount varies by type of service and how the discounted rates relate to Medicare fees. Our results show that, despite achieving large discounts (approximately 10 20 percent) relative to their indemnity plans, the two nationwide PPOs studied here pay at rates substantially above Medicare levels.