ArticleAnesthesiology2025
Using Quantity of Service Data in Medicaid Claims to Estimate Anesthesia Time.
Article in Anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Time Matters: One Year Later, Rethinking Anesthesia Time.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSurgical procedure duration and anesthesia time are important variables, with applications including measurement of quality of care and quantity of anesthetic exposure. This study evaluates data from Medicaid anesthesia claims as a proxy for anesthesia time.
methodsFee-for-service anesthesia claims for appendectomies and cholecystectomies of beneficiaries under age 65 yr from the Medicaid Analytic eXtract (1999 to 2013) were identified. The quantity of service (QoS) variable in anesthesia claims was evaluated on three criteria: (1) reflection of expected anesthesia time, (2) correlation with Medicaid payment, and (3) state interpretation of QoS as anesthesia time by evaluating payments estimated using state-specific billing rules and correlation with actual payments. Spearman correlations were calculated with coefficients above 0.7 considered to be strong.
resultsA total of 902,492 fee-for-service anesthesia claims were identified from 48 states and Washington, D.C., with 14 states reporting QoS values in units, 19 reporting in minutes, and 16 reporting in both units and minutes. The median QoS values for appendectomy and cholecystectomy were 6 and 7 U in claims reporting time in units and 76 and 89 min in claims reporting time in minutes, respectively. The majority of unit states (9 of 14; 64%) and minute states (14 of 19; 74%) met all three criteria. For the 16 states reporting QoS values in both units and minutes, 8 of 16 (50%) reported unit claims and 9 of 16 (56%) reported minute claims that met the three criteria.
conclusionsThe QoS variable reported on state Medicaid anesthesia claims had utility in approximating anesthesia time as minutes or 15-min units when evaluating anesthesia claims from two common surgical procedures. However, this variable does not accurately reflect anesthesia time in every state, and even in states where QoS was deemed to be usable, outliers and misclassified data need to be addressed.
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.