Insurance Status and Access to Otolaryngology Care: National Mystery Caller Study in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential differences in new patient appointment wait times for otolaryngology care based on insurance types and explore factors influencing these wait times. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional audit study, using a "mystery caller" approach, analyzed with a linear mixed Poisson model to adjust for confounding factors. SETTING: A total of 612 physicians across 49 states and the District of Columbia, representing 6 otolaryngology subspecialties, were included. METHODS: Otolaryngology physicians were contacted by mystery callers via telephone with scripted clinical vignettes as patients with either Medicaid or Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BCBS) insurance. Callers requested next available appointment. Wait times for new patient appointments were recorded and analyzed in R using a generalized linear mixed Poisson model. RESULTS: A total of 1183 of 1224 calls reached a representative. Medicaid patients waited 5.73% longer (P < .001) compared to BCBS patients (IRR: 1.06; confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.09; P < .001), with respective mean wait times of 36.8 days (SE ± 1.6) and 32.4 days (SE ± 1.6). Longer waiting times were also associated with physicians affiliated with universities (P = .001) and certain subspecialties, such as pediatric otolaryngology (P < .001) and neurotology (P = .008). Regional differences were also observed, with specific AAO-HNS regions showing shorter wait times. The model achieved a conditional R-squared value of 0.947. CONCLUSION: This study reveals disparities in wait times for otolaryngology care based on insurance type, with extended wait times for Medicaid beneficiaries. The findings highlight a potential access to care disparity, which begets the need for strategies that ensure equitable access to otolaryngology care and further research to understand the underlying reasons for these potential disparities.

Adjusting pulse amplitude during transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) application produces greater hypoalgesia.

UNLABELLED: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a noninvasive technique used for pain modulation. During application of TENS there is a fading of current sensation. Textbooks of electrophysical agents recommend that pulse amplitude should be constantly adjusted. This seems to be accepted clinically despite the fact that there is no direct experimental evidence. The aim of the current study was to investigate the hypoalgesic effect of adjusting TENS pulse amplitude on pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in healthy humans. Fifty-six healthy TENS naïve participants were recruited and randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups (n = 14 per group): control, placebo TENS, fixed pulse amplitude TENS, and adjusted pulse amplitude TENS. Both active and placebo TENS were applied to the dominant forearm. PPTs were recorded from 2 points on the dominant forearm and hand before, during, and after 40 minutes of TENS. TENS increased the PPTs on the forearm (P = .003) and hand (P = .003) in the group that received the adjusted pulse amplitude when compared to all other groups. The mean final pulse amplitude for the adjusted pulse amplitude TENS group was 35.51 mA when compared to the fixed pulse amplitude TENS group, which averaged 31.37 mA (P = .0318). PERSPECTIVE: These results suggest that it is important to adjust the pulse amplitude during TENS application to get the maximal analgesic effect. We propose that the fading of current sensation allows the use of higher pulse amplitudes, which would activate a greater number of and deeper tissue afferents to produce greater analgesia.