Rural Otolaryngology Care Disparities: A Scoping Review

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.

Geospatial evaluation of access to otolaryngology care in the United States

Objectives

This county-level epidemiological study evaluated the travel distance to the nearest otolaryngologist for continental US communities and identified socioeconomic differences between low- and high-access regions.

Methods

Geospatial analysis of publicly available 2015-2022 NPI records was combined with US census data to identify geospatial gaps in otolaryngologist distribution. Moran's index geospatial clustering in distance to the nearest county with an otolaryngologist was used as the core metric for differential access determination. Univariate logistic analysis was conducted between low- and high-access counties for 20 socioeconomic and demographic variables.

Results

Nationally, the average person was 22 miles from an otolaryngologist. 444 counties were identified as geospatially "low access" with increased travel distance in the Midwest, Great Planes, and Nevada with a median of 47 miles. 1231 counties in the Eastern United States and Western Coast were identified as "high access" with a 3-mile median travel distance. Areas of low access to otolaryngological care had smaller median populations (12,963 vs. 558,306), had smaller percent Black and Asian populations (2% vs. 11%, 1% vs. 5%, respectively), had a greater percent American Indian population (2% vs. 1%), were less densely populated (8 vs. 907 people per square mile), had fewer percent college graduates (20% vs. 34%), and fewer otolaryngologists per county (median: 0.01-20).

Conclusion

These findings highlight disparity in otolaryngology care in the United States and the need for otolaryngology funding initiatives in the Midwest and Great Plains regions.

Level of Evidence

Level 3.

Evaluating Geographic Access to Interdisciplinary Laryngology and Speech-Language Pathology Clinic Models in the Southeast Region of the United States

OBJECTIVE

An interdisciplinary model of care for the evaluation and treatment of voice, swallowing, and upper airway disorders with laryngologists and specialized speech-language pathologists is known to increase revenue, attendance to visits, patient adherence, and most importantly, improve patient outcomes. Individuals who live outside of areas with high population density often have reduced geographic access to this specialized care. The primary aim of this study is to identify the percentage of the population that has an "extended drive time" to access an interdisciplinary clinic in the Southeast region of the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

NA.

METHODS

Interdisciplinary laryngology and speech-language pathology clinics were identified via publicly accessible information including an internet search and state department of public health databases. Included clinics had at least one full-time fellowship-trained laryngologist and at least one full-time speech-language pathologist on staff. Descriptive statistics and visual representation of the results were achieved with the use of Smappen, a location intelligence online platform, to identify the percent of the population with a drive time greater than 1 hour.

RESULTS

47.24% of the Southeast population of the United States must drive over 1 hour to access an interdisciplinary clinic. Visual representations of these data are included and generated by Smappen.

CONCLUSIONS

While close geographic proximity does not ensure access to care, it can increase the likelihood that healthcare services will be used. This study identified the population in the Southeast region of the United States with extended drive time to interdisciplinary voice and swallowing centers due to their geographic distance from these centers. The results from this study support the need for increased geographic access to specialty care clinics, specifically voice, swallowing, and upper airway care, and provide insight into potential sites for interdisciplinary centers based on population density in areas that are underserved.

The Global Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Workforce

Importance

A core component of delivering care of head and neck diseases is an adequate workforce. The World Health Organization report, Multi-Country Assessment of National Capacity to Provide Hearing Care, captured primary workforce estimates from 68 member states in 2012, noting that response rates were a limitation and that updated more comprehensive data are needed.

Objective

To establish comprehensive workforce metrics for global otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) with updated data from more countries/territories.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional electronic survey characterizing the OHNS workforce was disseminated from February 10 to June 22, 2022, to professional society leaders, medical licensing boards, public health officials, and practicing OHNS clinicians.

Main Outcome

The OHNS workforce per capita, stratified by income and region.

Results

Responses were collected from 121 of 195 countries/territories (62%). Survey responses specifically reported on OHNS workforce from 114 countries/territories representing 84% of the world's population. The global OHNS clinician density was 2.19 (range, 0-61.7) OHNS clinicians per 100 000 population. The OHNS clinician density varied by World Bank income group with higher-income countries associated with a higher density of clinicians. Regionally, Europe had the highest clinician density (5.70 clinicians per 100 000 population) whereas Africa (0.18 clinicians per 100 000 population) and Southeast Asia (1.12 clinicians per 100 000 population) had the lowest. The OHNS clinicians deliver most of the surgical management of ear diseases and hearing care, rhinologic and sinus diseases, laryngeal disorders, and upper aerodigestive mucosal cancer globally.

Conclusion and Relevance

This cross-sectional survey study provides a comprehensive assessment of the global OHNS workforce. These results can guide focused investment in training and policy development to address disparities in the availability of OHNS clinicians.

Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement Variation Between Rural and Urban Otolaryngologists

OBJECTIVE

To compare billing practices, reimbursement rates, and patient populations of otolaryngology (ORL) physicians practicing in rural and urban settings.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Data.

METHODS

Medicare-allowed payments, number of services, and number of patients were gathered along with patient population comorbidity statistics, including average hierarchical condition category risk scores.

RESULTS

In 2019, 92% of the overall total 8959 ORL physicians practiced in an urban setting. These 8243 urban ORL physicians, on average, billed for 51 (interquartile range [IQR], 31-67) unique Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes, cared for 393 (IQR, 172-535) Medicare patients, performed 1761 (IQR, 502-2070) services, and collected $139,957 (IQR, $55,527-$178,479) per provider. In contrast, the 704 rural ORL physicians, on average, billed for a greater number of unique HCPCS codes (59; IQR, 37-77; P < .001), treated more Medicare patients (445; IQR, 242-614; P < .001), and performed more services (2330; IQR, 694-2748; P < .001) but collected about the same per provider ($141,035; IQR, $56,555-$172,864; P = .426). Older age was associated with rural practice (P = .027). Among both urban and rural ORL physicians, the variety and complexity of procedures and patient comorbidity profiles were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Most ORL physicians practice in large urban settings, a finding potentially related to financial sustainability and career opportunity. With an already small workforce, the aging rural ORL physician population is an identifiable weak point in the otolaryngology specialty that must be addressed with geo-specific recruitment campaigns, rural work incentivization, and the development of career advancement opportunities in rural areas.