Search

Background: Determining the clinical effort associated with preparing for revision total hip and knee arthroplasty is necessary to maintain the appropriate work relative value unit rating. We have investigated the work done by the orthopedic surgical team in the days and weeks prior to revision hip and knee arthroplasty using a count of time by team members in the electronic medical record (EMR).Methods: EMR audit logs were generated, and preoperative work (POW) was calculated for members of the surgical team for 200 sequential revision cases. Independent samples t-tests were conducted to compare total POW for procedure, age, gender, insurance, and health literacy; significance threshold was set at P = .05.Results: POW was 97.7 minutes (standard deviation [SD] 53.1). Surgeon POW accounted for 10.5 minutes (SD 9.3), nurses for 29.9 minutes (SD 34.2), mid-level providers for 22.1 minutes (SD 17.0), and office technicians for 34.1 minutes (SD 35.2). There was no difference in total POW based on procedure (hip vs knee), age, gender, insurance type, or health literacy.Conclusion: Revision arthroplasty requires substantial preoperative preparation from the surgical team. Most of this is by nurses, mid-level providers, and office staff. This does not seem to be different for hip or knee revisions or by age and gender. EMR audit logs capture the bare minimum POW required to prepare a patient for revision arthroplasty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To assess the impact of EHR technology on the work and workflow of ICU physicians and compare time spent by ICU resident and attending physicians on various tasks before and after EHR implementation. Design EHR technology with electronic order management (CPOE, medication administration and pharmacy system) and physician documentation was implemented in October 2007. Measurement We collected a total of 289 h of observation pre- and post-EHR implementation. We directly observed the work of residents in three ICUs (adult medical/surgical ICU, pediatric ICU and neonatal ICU) and attending physicians in one ICU (adult medical/surgical ICU). Results EHR implementation had an impact on the time distribution of tasks as well as the temporal patterns of tasks. After EHR implementation, both residents and attending physicians spent more of their time on clinical review and documentation (40% and 55% increases, respectively). EHR implementation also affected the frequency of switching between tasks, which increased for residents (from 117 to 154 tasks per hour) but decreased for attendings (from 138 to 106 tasks per hour), and the temporal flow of tasks, in particular around what tasks occurred before and after clinical review and documentation. No changes in the time spent in conversational tasks or the physical care of the patient were observed. Conclusions The use of EHR technology has a major impact on ICU physician work (e.g., increased time spent on clinical review and documentation) and workflow (e.g., clinical review and documentation becoming the focal point of many other tasks). Further studies should evaluate the impact of changes in physician work on the quality of care provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of public and private payers in the United States currently use the Medicare Resource-Based Relative Value Scale as the basis for physician payment. Many large group and academic practices have adopted this objective system of physician work to benchmark physician productivity, including using it, wholly or in part, to determine compensation. The Resource-Based Relative Value Scale survey instrument, used to value physician services, was designed primarily for procedural services, leading to current concerns that American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) surveys may undervalue nonprocedural evaluation and management services. The American Academy of Pediatrics is represented on the RUC, the committee charged with maintaining accurate physician work values across specialties and age groups. The Academy, working closely with other primary care and subspecialty societies, actively pursues a balanced RUC membership and a survey instrument that will ensure appropriate work relative value unit assignments, thereby allowing pediatricians to receive appropriate payment for their services relative to other services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to quantify potential physician work efficiencies and appropriate multiple procedure payment reductions for different same-session diagnostic imaging studies interpreted by different physicians in the same group practice. Methods: Medicare Resource-Based Relative Value Scale data were analyzed to determine the relative contributions of various preservice, intraservice, and postservice physician diagnostic imaging work activities. An expert panel quantified potential duplications in professional work activities when separate examinations were performed during the same session by different physicians within the same group practice. Maximum potential work duplications for various imaging modalities were calculated and compared with those used as the basis of CMS payment policy. Results: No potential intraservice work duplication was identified when different examination interpretations were rendered by different physicians in the same group practice. When multiple interpretations within the same modality were rendered by different physicians, maximum potential duplicated preservice and postservice activities ranged from 5% (radiography, fluoroscopy, and nuclear medicine) to 13.6% (CT). Maximum mean potential duplicated work relative value units ranged from 0.0049 (radiography and fluoroscopy) to 0.0413 (CT). This equates to overall potential total work reductions ranging from 1.39% (nuclear medicine) to 2.73% (CT). Across all modalities, this corresponds to maximum Medicare professional component physician fee reductions of 1.23 ± 0.38% (range, 0.95%-1.87%) for services within the same modality, much less than an order of magnitude smaller than those implemented by CMS. For services from different modalities, potential duplications were too small to quantify. Conclusions: Although potential efficiencies exist in physician preservice and postservice work when same-session, same-modality imaging services are rendered by different physicians in the same group practice, these are relatively minuscule and have been grossly overestimated by current CMS payment policy. Greater transparency and methodologic rigor in government payment policy development are warranted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess potential physician work efficiencies when more than one diagnostic imaging study is interpreted by the same provider during the same session. Methods: Medicare Physician Fee Schedule data from the American Medical Association Resource-Based Relative Value Scale Data Manager for 2011 were analyzed to quantify relative contributions of preservice, intraservice, and postservice physician work to the total work of rendering diagnostic imaging services. An expert panel review identified potential duplications in preservice and postservice work when multiple examinations are performed on the same patient during the same session. Maximum potential percentage work duplication for various diagnostic imaging modalities was calculated and compared to US Government Accountability Office estimates. Results: The relative contributions of preservice and postservice work to total work varied by modality, ranging from 20% [computed tomography (CT)] to 33% (ultrasound). The maximum percentage of potentially duplicated preservice and postservice activity ranged from 19% (nuclear medicine) to 24% (ultrasound). Maximum mean potentially duplicated work relative value units ranged from 0.0212 for radiography to 0.0953 for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Maximum percentage work reduction ranged from 4.32% for CT to 8.15% for ultrasound. This corresponds to maximum professional Physician Fee Schedule reductions of only 2.96% (CT) to 5.45% (ultrasound), approximating an order of magnitude less than the Government Accountability Office''s recommendations. Conclusion: Although potential efficiencies in physician work occur when multiple services are provided to the same patient during the same session, these are highly variable and considerably less than previously estimated. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

With an increased focus on payment and productivity measurement in health care, it is essential to understand the genesis and principles behind the Medicare Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS) physician fee schedule. The majority of third-party payers, including a growing number of Medicaid programs and commercial payers, use variations of the Medicare RBRVS as their basis for physician payment. Many group practices have also adopted this system to benchmark physician productivity and determine variable compensation and bonus payments. Because pediatric care is underrepresented in any Medicare-based payment system analysis, unique aspects of physician work and practice expense may not be accurately reflected in the total relative value units (RVUs) for certain pediatric services. Despite this potential limitation, the American Academy of Pediatrics supports the use of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to report unique physician work and the RBRVS physician fee schedule as a uniform payment system. The American Academy of Pediatrics will continue to work to rectify perceived inequities of the RBRVS system as they pertain to pediatrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The challenges to the technical component (TC) of radiology services as a result of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 have been widely publicized, but a number of regulatory changes will affect the professional component (PC) of our physician work. The third 5-year review is complete, and although there were no major reductions in work relative value units (RVUs) for radiology, proposed budget-neutrality adjustments to physician work RVUs will potentially reduce payments for both the PC and global payments. Additionally, if there is no congressional intervention, reductions in the conversion factor will further decrease Medicare payments. In the article, the history of the radiology relative value scale and the methodology of American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee’s valuation of physician work are reviewed. The results of the third 5-year review are presented. Future challenges to radiology physician work valuation are discussed, including outsourcing, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission’s search for overvalued services, and the bundling of physician services. Whereas the TC is compensation for performing a diagnostic test, ultimately, it is our physician work that defines our specialty, and challenges to our physician work will be vigorously defended by the ACR without compromise. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]