Private Equity and Urology: An Emerging Model for Independent Practice.

Independent urology practices are under increasing competitive pressure in a changing marketplace. By providing access to capital and business management expertise, private equity can help practices consolidate and scale to unlock new growth opportunities, navigate an increasingly complex regulatory environment, and institute best practice across a network, while retaining physician ownership and an opportunity for equity appreciation. This article examines the role of private equity in urology and the potential benefits of private equity investment. It also looks at what firms look for in investment partners, how to prepare for private equity investment, and how private equity investments are structured.

Implementation of a Centralized, Cost-effective Call Center in a Large Urology Community Practice.

Call centers provide front-line care and service to patients. This study compared call-answering efficiency and costs between the implementation of an internal, centralized call center (January to July 2019) and previously outsourced call-center services (January to July 2018) for a large urology community practice. Retrospective review of call metrics and cost data was performed. Internal call-center leadership, training, and culture was examined through survey of staff and management. A total of 299,028 calls with an average of 5751 calls per week were answered during the study periods. The Average Speed of Answer (ASA) was 1:42 (min:s) for the outsourced call center and 0:14 for the internal call center (P < 0.001), with 70% of outsourced calls answered under 2 minutes compared with 99% of calls for the internal call center (P < 0.001). The Average Handle Time (AHT) for each outsourced call was 5:32 versus 3:41 for the internal call center (P < 0.001). The total operating expenses were 7.7% lower for the internal call center. Surveys revealed the importance of engaged leadership and staff training with feedback, simplified work algorithms, and expanded clinical roles. We found that internal, centralized call centers may provide a call-answering solution with greater efficiency and lower total operating expense versus an outsourced call center for large surgical practices. A culture that emphasizes continuous improvement and empowers call-center staff with expanded clinical roles may ultimately enhance patient communication and service.

The Cost of Prostate Biopsies and their Complications: A Summary of Data on All Medicare Fee-for-Service Patients over 2 Years.

INTRODUCTION: We define the cost of a contemporary prostate biopsy and the rate and incremental impact of complications on costs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all Medicare fee-for-service claims for prostate biopsies in the United States from January 31, 2014 to December 1, 2015 was performed. Costs of each biopsy episode (including 30 days after each biopsy) were calculated. The effects of complications, biopsy setting and subsequent inpatient hospitalization were explored. RESULTS: The average cost of the 234,819 biopsies reviewed was $2,020 and 46% of biopsy costs occurred in the 30 days following each biopsy. Biopsies performed in the office setting comprised 66% of the total and were least costly ($1,750) compared to biopsies performed in ambulatory surgical centers ($2,260) and outpatient hospital settings ($2,730, both p <0.001). Biopsies performed in the office setting were associated with fewer complications (10%) compared to the outpatient hospital (19%) or ambulatory surgical center settings (12%, both p <0.001). An uncomplicated biopsy episode cost an average of $1,740, which increased to $4,060 when at least 1 complication occurred (difference +$2,320, p <0.001). The largest charges incurred were related to inpatient admissions, which added $13,840 to the cost of a prostate biopsy (p <0.001) but were rare, constituting only 2.8% of biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of costs during prostate biopsy episodes occur due to complications that occur in the days following a biopsy. These data should be used as benchmarks to incentivize interventions to reduce complications and subsequent admissions following biopsies.

The Effect of Local Antibiogram-based Augmented Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Infection-related Complications Following Prostate Biopsy.

Given the number of prostate biopsies performed annually in the United States and associated infectious events as a result, we sought to determine if implementation of a standardized biopsy protocol utilizing antibiotic prophylaxis based on locally derived antibiograms would result in a decrease, relative to a contemporary control population, in the incidence of infection-related complications among community-based practices. A total of nine member groups of LUGPA participated in both a retrospective review and a prospective study of infection-related complications following prostate biopsy. Historic infectious complications, defined as chills/rigor, temperature higher than 101 °F, or documented positive blood or urine cultures, were self-reported by a retrospective review of patients undergoing prostate biopsy under the practice's current protocol in the year prior to the study. The prospective phase of the study required each group to develop a locally derived augmented prophylaxis regimen (>2 antibiotics) based on local antibiograms. After implementation, the practices enrolled patients undergoing prostate biopsy over an 8-week period. Monitoring for infection-related complication took place over the ensuing 3 weeks post-biopsy. Seven hundred fifty-nine patients over nine practices were enrolled into the study utilizing the augmented locally determined prophylaxis protocol. There was a 53% reduction in the incidence of infection-related complication, relative to the historical rate. By developing a standardized biopsy protocol with specific emphasis on incorporating an augmented antibiotic prophylactic regimen based upon local antibiograms, we were able to demonstrate in a prospective trial across nine geographically distinct community practices a significant reduction in the incidence of infection-related complications.

The LUGPA Alternative Payment Model for Initial Therapy of Newly Diagnosed Patients With Organ-confined Prostate Cancer: Rationale and Development.

Over the past several decades, rapid expansion in healthcare expenditures has exposed the utilization incentives inherent in fee-for-service payment models. The passage of Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 heralded a transition toward value-based care, creating incentives for practitioners to accept bidirectional risk linked to outcome and utilization metrics. At present, the limited availability of these vehicles excludes all but a handful of providers from participation in alternative payment models (APMs). The LUGPA APM supports the goals of the triple aim in improving the patient experience, enhancing population health and reducing expenditures. By requiring utilization of certified electronic health record technologies, tying payment to quality metrics, and requiring practices to bear more than nominal risk, the LUGPA APM qualifies as an advanced APM, thereby easing the reporting burden and creating opportunities for participating practices.