Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31372371›Full record

ArticleUrology practice2019

Commercial Insurance Coverage for Inflatable Penile Prosthesis at a Tertiary Care Center.

John M Masterson, Bruce Kava, Ranjith Ramasamy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urology practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

John M MastersonDepartment of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Bruce KavaDepartment of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Ranjith RamasamyDepartment of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
University of Miami · US

Funding

Miami Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR002736 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI CARRASQUILLO, OLVEEN, KOBETZ, ERIN N · 2018 to 2022
$23.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002736
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInflatable penile prosthesis has become an important treatment modality for men with erectile dysfunction that is refractory to medication. Despite high levels of patient satisfaction following inflatable penile prosthesis placement and inflatable penile prosthesis coverage by Medicare, coverage by commercial insurance providers is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the coverage of inflatable penile prosthesis by commercial insurance providers.

methodsFollowing institutional review board approval all men with erectile dysfunction interested in obtaining inflatable penile prosthesis at our tertiary care center between January 2016 and December 2017 were evaluated. We reviewed billing records for CPT code 54405 during the study period to evaluate the insurance provider for all men who received an inflatable penile prosthesis. We also reviewed a manually maintained record of excluded or denied inflatable penile prosthesis claims for men who desired inflatable penile prosthesis but could not obtain it. Through medical record review we recorded the etiology of erectile dysfunction and the specific type of insurance policy for each man.

resultsMedicare is the most common insurer for inflatable penile prosthesis, insuring 87 of 220 (39.5%) men seeking inflatable penile prosthesis between 2016 and 2017. Among the remaining 127 men seeking inflatable penile prosthesis with commercial insurance coverage 61 (48.0%) were unable to obtain the device due to exclusions in their coverage or denials. Among commercially insured men seeking inflatable penile prosthesis 77 (62.6%) and 37 (30.0%) had health maintenance organization and preferred provider organization plans, respectively. The most prevalent indications for inflatable penile prosthesis among the entire study population were radical prostatectomy (30.9%), organic erectile dysfunction (30.5%) and diabetes mellitus (20.9%).

conclusionsThe largest insurer for inflatable penile prosthesis in the Miami region is Medicare. While some patients seeking inflatable penile prostheses can receive insurance coverage, a large percentage (48.0%) are not able to receive coverage despite having a medical necessity for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Indexed as

erectile dysfunctioninsurancepenile prosthesis

Identifiers

PMID31372371
PMCPMC6675033
OpenAlexW2892189094

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.