An Analysis of Procedural Medicare Reimbursement Rates in Hand Surgery: 2000 to 2019

Wide-Awake Carpal Tunnel Release in the United States: Trends in Volume and Reimbursement by Operative Setting

BACKGROUND

Office-based surgery can increase logistical and financial efficiency for patients and surgeons. The current study compares wide-awake, office-based carpal tunnel release to wide-awake operations performed in the operating room in terms of volume, financial burden, narcotic prescriptions, and adverse events.

METHODS

Operations performed under local-only anesthesia from 2010 to 2020 were identified in a national administrative database (PearlDiver). Patients were grouped by surgical setting and matched based on age, sex, comorbidity burden, and geographic region. Primary endpoints included total disbursement and physician reimbursement, and 30-day narcotics prescriptions, emergency department (ED) visits, and surgical site infections (SSIs).

RESULTS

Before matching, there were 303,741 operating room operations and 5463 office operations. From 2010 to 2020, the percentage of operations in the office increased from 1.2% to 3.4%. Matched cohorts included 21,835 operating room operations and 5459 office operations. Office surgery was associated with lower total disbursement and physician reimbursement for patients with commercial insurance, Medicaid, and Medicare. Linear regression modeling indicated that office-based surgery was significantly associated with lower total disbursement and physician reimbursement. Fewer office patients filled narcotic prescriptions and visited the ED, and there was no difference in SSIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with operating room surgery, office surgery was associated with lower financial burden, fewer narcotics prescriptions and ED visits, and a similar incidence of SSIs. These findings, together with literature showing greater efficiency in the office, suggest that office-based operations are safe and cost-effective and should continue to grow.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Unveiling the Hidden Discrepancies Between Medicare Physician Reimbursement Rates and Inflation Across Different Surgical Specialties

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the trends of Medicare physician reimbursement from 2011 to 2021 and compare the rates across different surgical specialties.

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of Medicare is essential because of its significant contribution in physician reimbursements. Previous studies across surgical specialties have demonstrated that Medicare, despite keeping up with inflation in some areas, has remained flat when accounting for physician reimbursement.

STUDY DESIGN

The Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary data for the calendar year 2021 were queried to extract the top 50% of Current Procedural Terminology codes based on case volume. The Physician Fee Schedule look-up tool was accessed, and the physician reimbursement fee was abstracted. Weighted mean reimbursement was adjusted for inflation. Growth rate and compound annual growth rate were calculated. Projection of future inflation and reimbursement rates were also calculated using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

RESULTS

After adjusting for inflation, the weighted mean reimbursement across surgical specialties decreased by -22.5%. The largest reimbursement decrease was within the field of general surgery (-33.3%), followed by otolaryngology (-31.5%), vascular surgery (-23.3%), and plastic surgery (-22.8%). There was a significant decrease in median case volume across all specialties between 2011 and 2021 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that, when adjusted for inflation, over the study period, there has been a consistent decrease in reimbursement for all specialties analyzed. Awareness of the current downward trends in Medicare physician reimbursement should be a priority for all surgeons, as means of advocating for compensation and to maintain surgical care feasible and accessible to all patients.

Direct Variable Cost Comparison of Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release: A Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Analysis

INTRODUCTION

To improve the delivery of value-based health care, a deeper understanding of the cost drivers in hand surgery is warranted. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) offers a more accurate estimation of resource utilization compared with top-down accounting methods. This study used TDABC to compare the facility costs of open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) and endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR).

METHODS

We identified 845 consecutive, unilateral carpal tunnel release (516 open, 329 endoscopic) surgeries performed at an orthopaedic specialty hospital between 2015 and 2021. Itemized facility costs were calculated using a TDABC algorithm. Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical characteristics, and itemized costs were compared between OCTR and ECTR. Multivariate regression was used to determine the independent effect of endoscopic surgery on true facility costs.

RESULTS

Total facility costs were $352 higher in ECTR compared with OCTR ($882 versus $530). ECTR cases had higher personnel costs ($499 versus $420), likely because of longer surgical time (15 versus 11 minutes) and total operating room time (35 versus 27 minutes). ECTR cases also had higher supply costs ($383 versus $110). Controlling for demographics and comorbidities, ECTR was associated with an increase in personnel costs of $35.74 (95% CI, $26.32 to $45.15), supply costs of $230.28 (95% CI, $205.17 to $255.39), and total facility costs of $265.99 (95% CI, $237.01 to $294.97) per case.

DISCUSSION

Using TDABC, ECTR was 66% more costly to the facility compared with OCTR. To reduce the costs related to endoscopic surgery, efforts to decrease surgical time and negotiate lower ECTR-specific supply costs are warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level II.

Medicare Reimbursement in Hand and Upper Extremity Procedures: A 20-Year Analysis

PURPOSE

Concern exists that Medicare physician fees for procedures have decreased over the past 20 years. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is set to re-evaluate these physician fees in the near future for concern that these procedures are overvalued. Our study sought to analyze trends in Medicare reimbursement rates from 2000 to 2019 for the top 20 most billed hand and upper extremity surgical procedures at our institution.

METHODS

The financial database of a single academic tertiary care center was queried to identify the Current Procedural Terminology codes most frequently utilized in orthopedic hand and upper extremity procedures in 2019. The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the CMS was queried for annual physician fee data. Monetary data were adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index of Urban Research Series (CPI-U-RS) and expressed in 2019 constant US dollars (USD). The average annual and total percent change in reimbursement were calculated via linear regression for all procedures (P < .05).

RESULTS

Accounting for inflation, the total average physician reimbursement decreased by 20.9% from 2000 to 2019, with 12 of 20 codes decreasing by more than 20%. The greatest decrease pertained to arthrodesis of the wrist at 33.9%. Upon linear regression, all procedures were found to decrease annually, with arthrodesis of the wrist decreasing by an average of 2.3% annually over this period.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 2 decades, physician reimbursement for hand and upper extremity procedures has significantly decreased.

Costs of shoulder and elbow procedures are significantly reduced in ambulatory surgery centers compared to hospital outpatient departments

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has shown the advantages of outpatient surgery for many shoulder and elbow procedures, including cost savings with equivalent safety in appropriately selected patients. Two common settings for outpatient surgeries are ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which function as independent financial and administrative entities, or hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), which are owned and operated by hospital systems. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder and elbow surgery costs between ASCs and HOPDs.

METHODS

Publicly available data from 2022 provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup Tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify shoulder and elbow procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopy, fracture, or miscellaneous. Total costs, facility fees, Medicare payments, patient payment (costs not covered by Medicare), and surgeon's fees were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Cost differences were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven CPT codes were identified. Arthroscopy procedures (n = 16) at ASCs had significantly lower total costs ($2667 ± $989 vs. $4899 ± $1917; P = .009), facility fees ($1974 ± $819 vs. $4206 ± $1753; P = .008), Medicare payments ($2133 ± $791 vs. $3919 ± $1534; P = .009), and patient payments ($533 ± $198 vs. $979 ± $383; P = .009) compared with HOPDs. Fracture procedures (n = 10) at ASCs had lower total costs ($7680 ± $3123 vs. $11,335 ± $3830; P = .049), facility fees ($6851 ± $3033 vs. $10,507 ± $3733; P = .047), and Medicare payments ($6143 ± $2499 vs. $9724 ± $3676; P = .049) compared with HOPDs, although patient payments were not significantly different ($1535 ± $625 vs. $1610 ± $160; P = .449). Miscellaneous procedures (n = 31) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4202 ± $2234 vs. $6985 ± $2917; P < .001), facility fees ($3348 ± $2059 vs. $6132 ± $2736; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3361 ± $1787 vs. $5675 ± $2635; P < .001), and patient payments ($840 ± $447 vs. $1309 ± $350; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. The combined cohort (n = 57) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4381 ± $2703 vs. $7163 ± $3534; P < .001), facility fees ($3577 ± $2570 vs. $6539.1 ± $3391; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3504 ± $2162 vs. $5892 ± $3206; P < .001), and patient payments ($875 ± $540 vs. $1269 ± $393; P < .001) compared with HOPDs.

CONCLUSION

Shoulder and elbow procedures performed at HOPDs for Medicare recipients were found to have average total cost increase of 164% compared with those performed at ASCs (184% savings for arthroscopy, 148% for fracture, and 166% for miscellaneous). ASC use conferred lower facility fees, patient payments, and Medicare payments. Policy efforts to incentivize migration of surgeries to ASCs may translate into substantial health care cost savings.

Medicare Reimbursement in Colorectal Surgery: A Growing Problem

BACKGROUND

Medicare reimbursement rates have decreased across various specialties but have not yet been studied in colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze Medicare reimbursement trends in colorectal surgery.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Physician Fee Schedule was evaluated for reimbursement data for the 20 most common colorectal surgery procedures from 2006 to 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Inflation-adjusted annual percentage change, compound annual growth rate, and total percentage change were the outcome measures. A subanalysis was performed comparing the changes in reimbursement between 2006 to 2016 and 2016 to 2020 because of legislative changes that went into effect in 2016.

RESULTS

During the study period, the inflation-unadjusted mean Medicare reimbursement rate for the 20 most common colorectal surgery procedures increased by +15.6%. This rise was surpassed by the inflation rate of +31.3%. Consequently, the inflation-adjusted reimbursement rate decreased by -11%. The adjusted reimbursement rates decreased the most at -33.8% for a flexible colonoscopy with biopsy and increased the most at +45.3% for a diagnostic rigid proctosigmoidoscopy. Annual percentage change was -0.79%, and the compound annual growth rate was -0.98%. There was an accelerated decrease in annual reimbursement rates from 2016 to 2020 at -2.23% compared to 2006 to 2016 at -0.22% ( p = 0.03). The only procedure that had an increase in adjusted reimbursement rate from 2016 to 2020 was the injection of sclerosing solution for hemorrhoids.

LIMITATIONS

Only Medicare reimbursement data were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare reimbursements for colorectal surgery procedures are decreasing at an accelerating rate. Although this study is limited to Medicare data, it still presents a representation of overall reimbursement changes because Medicare policies have a ripple effect in the commercial insurance market. It is vital to understand the financial trends to be able to structure future patient care teams and to advocate for the sustainability of colorectal surgery practices in the United States. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C136 .

REEMBOLSO DE MEDICARE EN CIRUGA COLORRECTAL UN PROBLEMA CRECIENTE

ANTECEDENTES: Las tasas de reembolso de Medicare han disminuido en varias especialidades, pero aún no han sido estudiado en cirugía colorrectal.OBJETIVO: Analizar las tendencias de reembolso de Medicare en cirugía colorrectal.DISEÑO: Estudio observacional.CONTEXTO: Se evaluó el programa de tarifas médicas de los Centros de Servicios de Medicare y Medicaid para obtener datos de reembolso de los 20 procedimientos más comunes en cirugía colorrectal entre los años 2006 y 2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Variación porcentual anual ajustada por inflación, tasa de crecimiento anual compuesta y variación porcentual total. Se realizó un subanálisis comparando los cambios en el reembolso entre los años 2006 a 2016 y 2016 a 2020 debido a los cambios legislativos que entraron en vigencia en 2016.RESULTADOS: Durante el período de estudio, la tasa media de reembolso de Medicare sin ajuste por inflación para los 20 procedimientos más comunes en cirugía colorrectal aumentó en +15,6 %. Esta suba fue superada por la tasa de inflación del +31,3%. En consecuencia, la tasa de reembolso ajustada por inflación disminuyó un -11%. Lo máximo que disminuyeron las tasas ajustadas de reembolso fue a -33,8% para una colonoscopia flexible con biopsia y aumentaron más a +45,3% para una proctosigmoidoscopia rígida de diagnóstico. El cambio porcentual anual fue -0,79% y la tasa de crecimiento anual compuesto fue -0,98%. Hubo una disminución acelerada en las tasas de reembolso anual de 2016 a 2020 a -2,23 % en comparación con 2006 a 2016 a -0,22% ( p = 0,03). El único procedimiento que tuvo un aumento en la tasa de reembolso ajustada de 2016 a 2020 fue la inyección de solución esclerosante para las hemorroides.LIMITACIONES: Solo se analizaron los datos de reembolso de Medicare.CONCLUSIONES: Los reembolsos de Medicare por procedimientos en cirugía colorrectal están disminuyendo a un ritmo acelerado. Aunque este estudio se limita a los datos de Medicare, aún presenta una representación de los cambios generales en los reembolsos, ya que las pólizas de Medicare tienen un efecto dominó en el mercado de seguros comerciales. Es fundamental comprender las tendencias financieras para poder estructurar futuros equipos de atención de pacientes y abogar por la sostenibilidad de las prácticas de cirugía colorrectal en los Estados Unidos. Consulte Video Resumen video en https://links.lww.com/DCR/C136 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

Identifying High Direct Variable Costs of Open Carpal Tunnel Release Patients Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing

PURPOSE

To improve value in health care delivery, a deeper understanding of the cost drivers in hand surgery is necessary. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) more accurately reflects true resource use compared with traditional accounting methods. This study used TDABC to explore the facility cost of carpal tunnel release and identify preoperative characteristics of high-cost patients.

METHODS

Using TDABC, we calculated the facility costs of 516 consecutive patients undergoing open carpal tunnel release at an orthopedic specialty hospital between 2015 and 2021. Patients in the top decile cost were defined as high-cost patients. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine preoperative characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, race, ethnicity, Elixhauser comorbidity index, American Society of Anesthesiology score, preoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, Short-Form 12, and anesthesia type) independently associated with high-cost patients.

RESULTS

Surgery-related personnel costs were the main driver (38.0%) of total facility costs, followed by preoperative personnel costs (21.3%). There was a 1.8-fold variation in facility cost between patients in the 90th and 10th percentiles ($774.69 vs $431.35), with the widest cost variations belonging to medication costs ($17.67 vs $1.85; variation, 9.6-fold) and other supply costs ($213.56 vs $65.56; variation, 3.3-fold). Using multivariable regression, predictors of high cost were patient age and use of general anesthesia. Total facility costs correlated strongly with the total operating room time and incision to closure time.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to decrease operating room time may translate into reduced personnel costs and greater cost savings. Multidisciplinary initiatives to control medication expenses for patients at risk of high costs may narrow the existing variation in costs.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis II.

Neurosurgical Utilization, Charges, and Reimbursement After the Affordable Care Act: Trends From 2011 to 2019

BACKGROUND

An estimated 50 million Americans receive Medicare health care coverage. Prior studies have established a downward trend in Medicare reimbursement for commonly billed surgical procedures, but it is unclear whether these trends hold true across all neurosurgical procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To assess trends in utilization, charges, and reimbursement by Medicare for neurosurgical procedures after passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010.

METHODS

We review yearly Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary datasets from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for all procedures billed by neurosurgeons to Medicare Part B between 2011 and 2019. Procedural coding was categorized into cranial, spine, vascular, peripheral nerve, and radiosurgery cases. Weighted averages for charges and reimbursements adjusted for inflation were calculated. The ratio of the weighted mean reimbursement to weighted mean charge was calculated as the reimbursement-to-charge ratio, representing the proportion of charges reimbursed by Medicare.

RESULTS

Overall enrollment-adjusted utilization decreased by 12.1%. Utilization decreased by 24.0% in the inpatient setting but increased by 639% at ambulatory surgery centers and 80.2% in the outpatient setting. Inflation-adjusted, weighted mean charges decreased by 4.0% while reimbursement decreased by 4.6%. Procedure groups that saw increases in reimbursement included cervical spine surgery, cranial functional and epilepsy procedures, cranial pain procedures, and endovascular procedures. Ambulatory surgery centers saw the greatest increase in charges and reimbursements.

CONCLUSION

Although overall reimbursement declined across the study period, substantial differences emerged across procedural categories. We further find a notable shift in utilization and reimbursement for neurosurgical procedures done in non-inpatient care settings.

Getting paid less for more: shoulder arthroplasty incidence and reimbursement within Medicare from 2000 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Shoulder arthroplasty has grown in popularity in the past 2 decades, especially following US Food and Drug Administration approval of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in 2003. Studies have shown that Medicare reimbursement for a variety of orthopedic procedures has decreased significantly over the past 2 decades. No study has evaluated this trend in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty, however. The purpose of this study was to assess true reimbursement trends in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty since 2000.

METHODS

Information was collected from the publicly available Medicare Part B National Summary Data Files for the period of 2000 to 2019. Data from Current Procedural Terminology codes 23470 (shoulder hemiarthroplasty), 23472 (TSA), 23473 (single-component revision shoulder arthroplasty), and 23474 (both-component revision shoulder arthroplasty) were analyzed. Reimbursement amounts were adjusted for inflation to May 2021 dollars.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2019, the number of shoulder hemiarthroplasty procedures billed to Medicare decreased 70% (from 5847 to 1750) whereas the number of TSA procedures increased 1527% (from 4044 to 65,477). During the same period, per-procedure Medicare reimbursement for hemiarthroplasty decreased 35% (from $1545.71 to $1003.43) after adjustment for inflation to 2021 dollars. Similarly, TSA reimbursement decreased 22% (from $1600.98 to $1248.76) after adjustment for inflation. For revision procedures, the number of single- and both-component revisions billed to Medicare increased 381% (from 344 to 1655) and 1331% (from 220 to 3147), respectively. Adjusted reimbursement per procedure decreased 36% (from $1931.62 to $1244.49) and 37% (from $2293.08 to $1449.43), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study shows an increase in the annual volume of primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2019. During the same period (2000-2019), true Medicare reimbursement to physicians for TSA decreased when adjusted for inflation. This study provides data that may be useful for surgeons, hospitals, and policy makers to maintain access to quality shoulder arthroplasty care moving forward.

A Comparative Analysis of the Common Injections Performed by Plastic Surgeons: 2012 and 2019

Background

Plastic surgeons regularly perform injections for both cosmetic and functional purposes. This article examines the most common injections utilized by plastic surgeons under Medicare and how their usage and billing has changed between 2012 and 2019.

Methods

Using the earliest and latest data available on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Provider Utilization and Payment Data File, we first determined Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System injection codes most billed to Medicare in 2012 and 2019. The number of services, amount of Medicare beneficiaries, and reimbursement rates were collected and analyzed for each Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System code from the Provider Utilization and Payment Data File for years 2012 and 2019. We compared the change in reimbursement rate for each injection to the rate of inflation in US dollars over the same period.

Results

The unadjusted Medicare reimbursement rate for eight included injection types increased an average of 31.63% during the study period. This was not significantly different from the rate of inflation during the same period (+11.33%, P = 0.311). When all Medicare reimbursement data were adjusted for inflation to 2019 dollars, the average percentage change in reimbursement for all included injections in this study increased by 17.58% from 2012 to 2019.

Conclusions

The findings from our study suggest that injections administered by plastic surgeons appear to be unique in their general stability in reimbursement rates as compared to rates in other fields. Further research should be performed to better understand the driving factors for usage and reimbursement changes.

Medicare Payment for Orthopaedic Oncology Procedures Over the Past 20 Years

Background:

Medicare payment has been examined in a variety of medical and surgical specialties. This study examines Medicare payment in the subspecialty of orthopaedic oncology.

Methods:

The Physician Fee Schedule Look-up Tool was used to obtain payment information from 2000 to 2020 for procedures related to orthopaedic oncology billed to Medicare.

Results:

For the 38 included orthopaedic oncology procedures, inflation-adjusted Medicare payment decreased an average of 13.6% overall from 2000 to 2020. After adjusting for inflation, the payment for procedures related to spine and pelvis increased by 7.6%, procedures relating to limb salvage increased by 14.6%, procedures associated with the surgical management of complications decreased by 26.9%, and procedures relating to metastatic disease management decreased by 34.8%.

Conclusion:

Medicare payment has declined by 13.6% from 2000 to 2020. This variation in Medicare payment represents a difference in valuation of these procedures by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and could be used to direct healthcare policy.