Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30682462›Full record

ArticleUrology2019

Impact of Medicare Office Visit Payment Reform on Urologic Practices.

Parth K Modi, Samuel R Kaufman, Megan V Caram, Chad Ellimoottil, Vahakn B Shahinian, Brent K Hollenbeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Parth K ModiDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI; Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI. Electronic address: pamodi@med.umich.edu.
Samuel R KaufmanDivision of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI.
Megan V CaramDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, MI.
Chad EllimoottilDivision of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI.
Vahakn B ShahinianDivision of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI; Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, MI.
Brent K HollenbeckDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI; Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, MI.

Funding

Impact of urologist practice organization and health policy on prostate cancer treatment, overtreatment and spendingR01HS025707 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HOLLENBECK, BRENT K., SHAHINIAN, VAHAKN B · 2017 to 2021
$1.7M
Impact of the Dissemination of Surgical Technology on Cancer Surgery OutcomesF32CA232332 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MODI, PARTH KIRAN · 2018 to 2018
$74k
AHRQ HHS R01 HS025707NCI NIH HHS F32 CA232332
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the 2019 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, which modifies reimbursement for office evaluation and management (E&M) visits. This policy moves payment to a single rate for levels 2 through 4 office E&M visits, regardless of complexity.

methodsUsing a 20% sample of 2015 National Medicare claims, we identified urologic practices and their practice organization, academic affiliation, and degree of office focus (ie, proportion of revenues from office visits). Using billing data for each practice, we calculated the revenues expected under the current system and the new policy (both E&M payments and a new add-on code). For each practice, we determined the impact of new payment rates on total Medicare payments.

resultsWe identified 2822 practices: 1372 (48.6%) solo practices, 1033 (36.6%) multispecialty groups, 322 (11.4%) small urology groups, and 95 (3.4%) large urology groups. Under the new reimbursement rates, the median practice would have a 0.9% increase in Medicare Part B payments (range -20.4% to +50.3%) and, with the add-on code, an increase of 6.8% (range -7.5% to +74.9%). Solo practices had the most heterogeneity, with a quarter losing at least 2.3%. The median multispecialty group would increase payments by 0.4% (range -13.7% to 50.3%). However, the 107 (10.4%) academic multispecialty groups had a median gain of only 0.1% (range -2.8% to +8.1%).

conclusionUrology groups would, on average, benefit from the anticipated change in Medicare office E&M visit payments. However, solo practices with a high office focus and academic multispecialty practices may see reduced Medicare payments.

Indexed as

Reimbursement MechanismsHumansMedicareOffice VisitsUnited StatesUrology

Identifiers

PMID30682462
PMCPMC6443448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.