Search

OBJECTIVE To compare the complexity of operations performed by female versus male surgeons. BACKGROUND Prior literature has suggested that female surgeons are relatively underemployed when compared to male surgeons, with regards to operative case volume and specialization. METHODS Operative case records from a large academic medical center from 1997 to 2018 were evaluated. The primary end point was work relative value unit (wRVU) for each case with a secondary end point of total wRVU per month for each surgeon. Multivariate linear analysis was performed, adjusting for surgeon race, calendar year, seniority, and clinical subspecialty. RESULTS A total of 551,047 records were analyzed, from 131 surgeons and 13,666 surgeon-months. Among them, 104,424 (19.0%) of cases were performed by female surgeons, who make up 20.6% (n = 27) of the surgeon population, and 2879 (21.1%) of the surgeon months. On adjusted analysis, male surgeons earned an additional 1.65 wRVU per case, compared to female surgeons (95% confidence interval 1.57-1.74). Subset analyses found that sex disparity increased with surgeon seniority, and did not improve over the 20-year study period. CONCLUSIONS Female surgeons perform less complex cases than their male peers, even after accounting for subspecialty and seniority. These sex differences are not due to availability from competing professional or familial obligations. Future work should focus on determining the cause and mitigating this underemployment of female surgeons.

Objective Assess the relationships between case total work relative value units (wRVU), patient frailty, and the physiologic stress of surgical interventions. Summary of background data Surgeon reimbursement is frequently apportioned by wRVU. These subjective, procedure-specific valuations generated by physician survey estimate the intensity and time for typical patient care services. We hypothesized wRVU would not adequately account for patient-specific factors, such as frailty, that modify the required physician work, regardless of procedural complexity. Methods Using National and Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Programs (2015-2018), we evaluated the correlation between case total wRVU, patient frailty (risk analysis index) and physiologic surgical stress (operative stress score). Results Of 4,111,371 (86%) cases, the correlation between total wRVU and operative stress was moderate [ρs = 0.587 (95% confidence interval, 0.586-0.587)], but negligible with frailty ρ = 0.177 (95% confidence interval, 0.176-0.178)]. Very high operative stress procedures [n = 34,047 (1%)] generated a mean total wRVU of 55.1 (standard deviation, 12.9), comprising 7%, 2%, and 1% of thoracic, vascular, and general surgical cases, respectively. Very frail patients [n = 152,535 (4%)] accounted for 9% of thoracic, 9% of vascular, 4% of general, 5% of urologic, and 4% of neurologic surgical cases, generating 21.0 (standard deviation, 12.4) mean total wRVU. Some nonfrail patients undergoing low operative stress procedures [n = 60,128 (2%)] nonetheless generated the highest quintile wRVU; these comprised >15% of plastic, gynecologic, and urologic surgical cases. Conclusions Surgeon reimbursement correlates with operative stress but not patient frailty. The total wRVU does not adequately reflect patient-specific factors that increase the physician workload required to render optimal care to complex patients.

The objective of this study was to evaluate a new academic relative-value unit (aRVU) scoring system linked to faculty compensation and analyze its association with overall departmental academic productivity.Faculty are often not incentivized or financially compensated for educational and research activities crucial to the academic mission.We launched an online, self-reporting aRVU system in 2015 to document and incentivize the academic productivity of our faculty. The system captured 65 specific weighted scores in 5 major categories of research, education, innovation, academic service, and peer review activities. The aRVU scores were rank-aggregated annually, and bonuses were distributed to faculty members in 3 tiers: top 10%, top third, and top half. We compared pre-aRVU (academic year 2015) to post-aRVU (academic year 2017) departmental achievement metrics.Since 2015, annual aRVU bonuses totaling $493,900 were awarded to 59 faculty members (58% of eligible department faculty). Implementing aRVUs was associated with significant increases in several key departmental academic achievement metrics: presentations (579 to 862; P = 0.02; 49% increase), publications (390 to 446; P = 0.02; 14%), total research funding ($4.6 M to $8.4 M; P0.001; 83%), NIH funding ($0.6 M to $3.4 M; P0.001; 467%), industry-sponsored clinical trials (8 to 23; P = 0.002; 188%), academic society committee positions (226 to 298; P0.001; 32%), and editorial leadership positions (50 to 74; P = 0.01; 48%).Implementing an aRVU system was associated with increases in departmental academic productivity. Although other factors undoubtedly contributed to these increases, an aRVU program may represent an important mechanism for tracking and rewarding academic productivity in surgery departments.