ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Professional fee payments by specialty for inpatient open ventral hernia repair: who gets paid for treating comorbidities and complications?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine perioperative professional fee payments to providers from different specialties for the care of patients undergoing inpatient open ventral hernia repair (VHR).
methodsPerioperative data of patients undergoing VHR at a single center over 3 years were selected from our NSQIP database. 180-day follow-up data were obtained via retrospective review of records and phone calls to patients. Professional fee payments (PFPs) to all providers were obtained from our physician billing system for the VHR hospitalization, the 180 days prior to operation (180Prior) and the 180 days post-discharge (180Post).
resultsPFPs for 283 cases were analyzed. Average total 360-day PFPs per patient were $3409 ± SD 3294, with 14.5% ($493 ± 1546) for services in the 180Preop period, 72.5% ($2473 ± 1881) for the VHR hospitalization, and 13.0% ($443 ± 1097) in the 180Postop period. The surgical service received 62% of PFPs followed by anesthesia (18%), medical specialties (9%), radiology (6%), and all other provider services (5%). Medical specialties received increased PFPs for care of patients with COPD and HCT < 38% ($90 and $521, respectively) and for the pulmonary complications ($2471) and sepsis ($2714) that correlated with those patient comorbidities; surgeons did not. Operative duration, mesh size, and separation of components were associated with increased surgeon PFPs (p < .05). At 6 months, wound complications were associated with increased surgeon and radiology payments (p < .01).
conclusionsManagement of acute comorbid conditions and the associated higher postoperative morbidity is not reimbursed to the surgeon under the 90-day global fee. These represent opportunity costs of care that pressure busy surgeons to select against these patients or to delegate more management to their medical specialty colleagues, thereby increasing total system costs. A comorbid risk adjustment of procedural reimbursement is warranted. In negotiating bundled payments, surgeon groups should keep in mind that surgeon reimbursement, unlike medical specialty and hospital reimbursement, have been bundled since the 1990s.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.