Search

Background: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) often require complex surgical reconstruction. This retrospective, cross‐sectional study compares financial factors influencing HNC and breast cancer (BC) care to examine care disparities. Methods: Pricing data from 2012 to 2021 was abstracted from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look‐Up Tool. Nonprofit and research support was quantified by searching the NIH, IRS, and GuideStar databases. New York State Department of Health data from 2015 to 2019 was analyzed to compare costs, charges, and payer mix. Results: HNC reconstructive procedures reimburse lower than comparable breast procedures (p < 0.05). Nonprofit and research support for HNC is disproportionately low relative to disease burden. Patients hospitalized for HNC surgical procedures generated higher costs and lower charges than patients with BC (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Comparatively low procedure reimbursement, low nonprofit support, and high cost of care for patients with HNC relative to patients with BC may contribute to care disparities for patients with HNC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The primary aim of this paper is to accelerate the number of randomized experimental studies of the reliability and validity in-home tele-neuropsychological testing (tele-np-t). Method We conducted a critical review of the tele-neuropsychology literature. We discuss this research in the context of the United States' public and private healthcare payer systems, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding system's telehealth lists, and existing disparities in healthcare access. Results The number of tele-np publications has been stagnant since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are less published experimental studies of tele-neuropsychology (tele-np), and particularly in-home tele-np-t, than other tele-np publications. There is strong foundational evidence of the acceptability, feasibility, and reliability of tele-np-t, but relatively few studies of the reliability and validity of in-home tele-np-t using randomization methodology. Conclusions More studies of the reliability and validity of in-home tele-np-t using randomization methodology are necessary to support inclusion of tele-np-t codes on the CMS and CPT telehealth lists, and subsequently, the integration and delivery of in-home tele-np-t services across providers and institutions. These actions are needed to maintain equitable reimbursement of in-home tele-np-t services and address the widespread disparities in healthcare access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Classification of Diseases: 10th Revision (effective from October 2015) included indoor tanning diagnosis codes for the first time. The majority of data on indoor tanning is self-reported. We used a large claims dataset to investigate the patients and settings in which indoor tanning International Classification of Diseases: 10th Revision codes are being used. We included encounters with the International Classification of Diseases: 10th Revision indoor tanning codes in Truven Health MarketScan data 2016-2018, which contain deidentified commercial insurance claims data for approximately 43 million patients. We used descriptive statistics to evaluate patient and encounter characteristics and normalized results using outpatient dermatology encounters. A total of 4,550 encounters were identified, 99.0% of which were outpatient, and 72.3% were with dermatology. Patients were majority female (85.0%) with ages ranging from 7 to 93. The Midwest region had the most indoor tanning encounters. Destruction of a premalignant lesion was performed in 15.1%, and biopsies were performed in 18.4% of encounters, suggesting that encounters may have been for skin cancer surveillance. Increased usage of indoor tanning International Classification of Diseases: 10th Revision codes in the coming years may strengthen the indoor tanning literature. Claims data are a potential tool to better understand patients who have a history of exposure to indoor tanning and their associated risk factors, comorbidities, behaviors, and healthcare utilization.

PurposeTo examine the effectiveness of the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) for preventing herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO) in the general United States population.DesignRetrospective, observational cohort study.ParticipantsIndividuals enrolled in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (OLDW; OptumLabs, Cambridge, MA) who were age eligible for herpes zoster (HZ) vaccination (≥50 years of age) from 2018 through 2019. The OLDW is a longitudinal, de-identified administrative claims and electronic health record database of patients in the United States with commercial insurance, Medicare Part D, or Medicare Advantage METHODS: Patients were required to have 365 days or more of continuous enrollment to be eligible. Those with a diagnosis code of HZ or an immunocompromising condition within 1 year before study inclusion were excluded. Vaccination with the RZV was ascertained by Current Procedural Terminology codes, and HZO was ascertained by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratio of HZO associated with RZV, and inverse-probability weighting was used to control for confounding. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated from hazard ratios.Main outcome measuresIncidence of HZO in vaccinated versus unvaccinated person-times and vaccine effectiveness were assessed.ResultsFrom January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019, a total of 4 842 579 individuals were included in this study. One hundred seventy-seven thousand two hundred eighty-nine (3.7%) received 2 valid doses of RZV. The incidence rate of HZO was 25.5 cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.4-35.8 cases) per 100 000 person-years in the vaccinated group compared with 76.7 cases (95% CI, 74.7-78.7 cases) in the unvaccinated group. The overall adjusted effectiveness of RZV against HZO was 89.1% (95% CI, 82.9%-93.0%).ConclusionsThe effectiveness of RZV against HZO in individuals 50 years of age and older is high in a clinical setting. However, the low vaccination rate in this study highlights the public health need to increase HZV use. Ophthalmologists can play an important role in recommending vaccination to eligible patients.

Rationale: Video visits became more widely available during the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic. However, the ongoing role and value of video visits in care delivery and how these may have changed over time are not well understood. Aims and Objectives: Compare the relative complexity of in‐person versus video visits during the COVID‐19 pandemic and describe the complexity of video visits over time. Methods: We used billing data for in‐person and video revisits from non‐behavioural health specialities with the most video visit utilisation (≥50th percentile) at a large, urban, public healthcare system from 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2022. We used current procedural terminology (CPT) codes as a proxy for information gathering and decision‐making complexity and time spent on an encounter. We compared the distribution of CPT codes 99211–99215 between in‐person and video visits using Fisher's exact tests. We used Spearman correlation to test for trends between proportions of CPT codes over time for video visits. Results: Ten specialities (adult primary care, paediatrics, adult dermatology, bariatric surgery, paediatric endocrinology, obstetrics and gynaecologist, adult haematology/oncology, paediatric allergy/immunology, paediatric gastroenterology, and paediatric pulmonology) met inclusion criteria. For each speciality, proportions of each CPT code for in‐person visits and for video visits varied significantly, and patterns of variation differed by speciality. For example, in adult primary care, video visits had smaller proportions of moderate/high complexity visits (99214 and 99215) and greater proportions of lower complexity visits (99211–99213) compared with in‐person visits (p < 0.001), but in paediatric endocrinology, the opposite was seen (p < 0.001). Trends in CPT codes over time for video visits in each speciality were also mixed. Conclusion: In‐person and video visits had differing proportions of complexity codes (typically skewing towards lower complexity for video visits). The complexity of video visits changed over time in many specialities. Observed patterns for both phenomena varied by speciality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In both Canada and the United States, workload measurement for anatomic pathology is mainly based on complexity and clinical significance of specimens, with gross examination being a considerable contributor. While Pathologists' Assistants (PAs) play an increasing role in gross examination, there is little known regarding the time required for PAs to complete grossing tasks. This information is essential for effective staffing and workload management in pathology laboratories. The objective of our study was to determine the time required for PAs to gross second and third trimester singleton placentas in a large tertiary hospital with a significant perinatal pathology service. Materials and Methods: For our study, 7 certified PAs each grossed a minimum of 10 second and third trimester singleton placentas using a standard placental grossing protocol, an electronic laboratory information system, and voice recognition dictation software. Placental specimens requiring photography, sampling for ancillary studies, or immediate pathologist's consultation were excluded. We calculated average and standard deviation of grossing times for each PA, overall average grossing time, and 95% confidence interval using a mixed linear regression model. We analyzed the impact of PA job experience, degree obtained, and number of blocks prepared on overall average in a multivariate analysis. Results: The mean grossing times for each PA ranged from 11.0 (standard deviation [sd] = 2.0) to 17.8 (sd = 4.5) minutes. The overall average grossing time was 14.5 minutes, with a 95% confidence interval of 11.7 to 17.3 minutes. In multivariate analysis, an increase in the number of blocks prepared was significantly associated with longer overall average grossing time. If 4 blocks were prepared consistently, the model predicted a slightly lower overall average of 13.3 minutes, with a 95% confidence interval of 10.9 to 15.7 minutes. Discussion: To our knowledge, our study is the first to objectively report time required for PAs to perform gross examinations of routine second and third trimester singleton placentas. The methodology of our study is replicable and can be applied to other specimen types and laboratory settings. Previously, estimated grossing times for specimens were primarily based on retrospective surveys, which were susceptible to recall errors and subjectivity. However, our study demonstrates objective data collection is achievable. Furthermore, the data collected from this study offer valuable insights into the accuracy of previous and current pathology workload models for second and third trimester singleton placentas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this letter, we discussed the selection of patients undergoing Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR) using the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. We examined a previous study using CPT code 37215 to identify TCAR cases using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. As an ACS-NSQIP participating site, we have complete access to the ACS-NSQIP database, and we performed a more in-depth examination of the method. We found significant discrepancies in the method described and conclude that it is methodologically flawed to use CPT code 37215 to differentiate TCAR cases. This study not only re-evaluates the validity of the previous study but also has the potential to prevent other researchers from employing the erroneous methodology for TCAR selection using the CPT code, which is one of the most widely used standardizations of medical communication for surgical procedures. This is particularly pertinent given the recent "TCAR revolution", where significant attention has been focused on TCAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current Procedural Terminology Codes is a numerical coding system used to bill for medical procedures and services and crucially, represents a major reimbursement pathway. Given that pathology services represent a consequential source of hospital revenue, understanding instances where codes may have been misassigned or underbilled is critical. Several algorithms have been proposed that can identify improperly billed CPT codes in existing datasets of pathology reports. Estimation of the fiscal impacts of these reports requires a coder (i.e., billing staff) to review the original reports and manually code them again. As the re-assignment of codes using machine learning algorithms can be done quickly, the bottleneck in validating these reassignments is in this manual re-coding process, which can prove cumbersome. This work documents the development of a rapidly deployable dashboard for examination of reports that the original coder may have misbilled. Our dashboard features the following main components: (1) a bar plot to show the predicted probabilities for each CPT code, (2) an interpretation plot showing how each word in the report combines to form the overall prediction, and (3) a place for the user to input the CPT code they have chosen to assign. This dashboard utilizes the algorithms developed to accurately identify CPT codes to highlight the codes missed by the original coders. In order to demonstrate the function of this web application, we recruited pathologists to utilize it to highlight reports that had codes incorrectly assigned. We expect this application to accelerate the validation of re-assigned codes through facilitating rapid review of false-positive pathology reports. In the future, we will use this technology to review thousands of past cases in order to estimate the impact of underbilling has on departmental revenue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately 476,000 cases of Lyme disease are diagnosed in the United States annually, yet comprehensive economic evaluations are lacking. In a prospective study among reported cases in Lyme disease–endemic states, we estimated the total patient cost and total societal cost of the disease. In addition, we evaluated disease and demographic factors associated with total societal cost. Participants had a mean patient cost of ≈$1,200 (median $240) and a mean societal cost of ≈$2,000 (median $700). Patients with confirmed disseminated disease or probable disease had approximately double the societal cost of those with confirmed localized disease. The annual, aggregate cost of diagnosed Lyme disease could be $345–968 million (2016 US dollars) to US society. Our findings emphasize the importance of effective prevention and early diagnosis to reduce illness and associated costs. These results can be used in cost-effectiveness analyses of current and future prevention methods, such as a vaccine.

Current Procedural Terminology Codes is a numerical coding system used to bill for medical procedures and services and crucially, represents a major reimbursement pathway. Given that pathology services represent a consequential source of hospital revenue, understanding instances where codes may have been misassigned or underbilled is critical. Several algorithms have been proposed that can identify improperly billed CPT codes in existing datasets of pathology reports. Estimation of the fiscal impacts of these reports requires a coder (i.e., billing staff) to review the original reports and manually code them again. As the re-assignment of codes using machine learning algorithms can be done quickly, the bottleneck in validating these reassignments is in this manual re-coding process, which can prove cumbersome. This work documents the development of a rapidly deployable dashboard for examination of reports that the original coder may have misbilled. Our dashboard features the following main components: (1) a bar plot to show the predicted probabilities for each CPT code, (2) an interpretation plot showing how each word in the report combines to form the overall prediction, and (3) a place for the user to input the CPT code they have chosen to assign. This dashboard utilizes the algorithms developed to accurately identify CPT codes to highlight the codes missed by the original coders. In order to demonstrate the function of this web application, we recruited pathologists to utilize it to highlight reports that had codes incorrectly assigned. We expect this application to accelerate the validation of re-assigned codes through facilitating rapid review of false-positive pathology reports. In the future, we will use this technology to review thousands of past cases in order to estimate the impact of underbilling has on departmental revenue.

Background: On January 1, 2021, the American Medical Association implemented changes regarding the outpatient Evaluation and Management (E/M) criteria dictating Current Procedural Terminology code level selection to help diminish administrative burden and emphasize medical decision-making as the primary determinant in E/M level of service (EML). The goal of this study was to describe EML coding trends in outpatient visits for hip and knee osteoarthritis after the 2021 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services changes to the E/M system.Methods: All outpatient visits for primary hip and knee osteoarthritis within the divisions of Joint Replacement, Operative Sports Medicine, and Nonoperative Sports Medicine at a single orthopaedic practice were retrospectively analyzed during 2 separate 10-month timeframes in 2019 and 2021. The primary endpoint was the visit EML (1 through 5) based on Current Procedural Terminology E/M codes.Results: In 2019, 7.8% of all visits were billed as level 2, 85.8% of all visits were billed as level 3, and 6.3% of all visits were billed as level 4. In 2021, 2.8% of visits were billed as level 2, 54% of visits were billed as level 3, and 41.3% of visits were billed as level 4. Level 1 and Level 5 visits did not exceed 2% in either year. Across all 3 divisions, level 2 and 3 visits decreased significantly (P < .05), while level 4 visits increased significantly (P < .05).Conclusion: Since the E/M coding criteria overhaul in 2021, there has been a significant trend towards higher level of service code selection across multiple divisions in our orthopaedic practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study seeks to evaluate the variability of Medicaid reimbursement and compare it with Medicare reimbursement using the 20 most commonly billed orthopaedic trauma Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes nationwide. The authors anticipate significant variability between states and hypothesize that Medicaid payment will be significantly less than Medicare payment., Methods: The top 20 most common orthopaedic trauma surgery procedural codes were identified from a previous analysis performed by Haglin et al. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule was used to determine reimbursement rates from Medicare, and state Medicaid fee schedules were used to determine reimbursement rates for Medicaid. State Medicaid rates were compared with their corresponding Medicare rates to determine a dollar difference. In addition, the dollar difference for each CPT code was divided by its respective physician relative value unit. This was used to acknowledge the possible variability in the complexity of orthopaedic procedures and the related physician effort. The Medicare Wage Index was used to adjust Medicaid rates based on the cost of living for the state as well. Coefficients of variation were calculated to represent overall variability in Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates., Results: The mean reimbursement rates for Medicaid were lower for all 20 procedures compared with Medicare. On average, Medicaid reimbursed 16.0% less than Medicare and 29.6% less when adjusting for cost of living. MCD reimbursed at a higher rate than MCR for all procedures in only 9 states (Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, and South Dakota) while 38 states reimbursed at a lower rate than MCR, on average. The coefficient of variation ranged from 0.24 to 0.34 for the Medicaid unadjusted group and from 0.35 to 0.46 for the Medicare Wage Index-adjusted group. By contrast, the Medicare group was consistent at 0.06 for all 20 procedures. The average dollar difference across the 20 CPT codes for Medicaid reimbursement compared with Medicare reimbursement ranged from -$76.89 to -$225.17, and the dollar difference per relative value unit ranged from -$5.96 to -$15.16., Conclusions: This study found a high amount of variation between state Medicaid reimbursement rates and average rates that were significantly lower than Medicare reimbursement rates for the top 20 most used orthopaedic trauma CPT codes as identified by Haglin et al. The discrepancy in reimbursement was increased when Medicaid rates were adjusted for state cost of living., Level of Evidence: Prognostic, Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Disclaimer: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time., Purpose: The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services affirmation enabled pharmacists to use Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for documentation and billing of clinical services. Despite legislative support and potential availability of pharmacists' clinical services, a gap may exist between the reported availability and actual prevalence of these services in real-world settings. The objective was to assess the prevalence of selected CPT codes (99605-99607, 98966-989968, and 99211-99215) in documenting and billing potential pharmacists' clinical services using recent available data., Methods: This retrospective study utilized the Merative MarketScan Medicare database from the period January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020. The dataset included deidentified patient information and CPT codes. Patients with CPT codes for face-to-face medication therapy management (MTM) services (99605-99607), codes for telephonic assessment and management (A/M) services (98966-98968), and/or codes for evaluation and management (E/M) services (99211-99215) were identified from outpatient claims. Descriptive statistics, including prevalence rates, were calculated. This study was approved by an institutional review board and followed STROBE guidelines., Results: There were claims data for 2,784,629 enrollees from 2016 through 2020. Prevalence rates varied during this period, with lower rates for MTM face-to-face CPT codes (0.06%) and telephonic A/M codes (0.58%), while E/M CPT codes showed higher prevalence rates (87%)., Conclusion: Study findings exhibited a limited adoption rate for MTM CPT codes for billing pharmacists' clinical services. Future research may focus on assessing pharmacists' perceptions and identifying facilitators and barriers to using CPT codes in billing clinical services., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Study Objective: Identify changes and trends in the real value of Medicare payments for anesthesia services between 2000 and 2020 and how it may affect practices., Design: Retrospective analysis., Setting: We utilized the Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) datasets of Medicare Part B claims to identify high volume anesthesia services in 2020 with 20 years of data. The Consumer Price Index was used as a measure of inflation to adjust prices., Patients: The PSPS datasets contain summaries of all annual Medicare Part B claims and payment amounts by carrier and locality., Interventions: Patients receiving anesthesia services., Measurements: For each service, identified by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, we trended the average Medicare payment per procedure from 2000 to 2020 and calculated year to year changes and compound annual growth rate (CAGR). We also evaluated base and time units for each CPT code and the national Medicare anesthesia conversion factor (CF) for the same years., Main Results: The average Medicare payment in the study sample increased 20.1% from 2000 to 2020. After adjusting for inflation, the average Medicare payment per anesthesia service decreased by 20.8% over that period. The Medicare anesthesia CF increased 24.9% in the same period, and after adjusting for inflation, the real value of the CF decreased 16.9%. Average CAGR across the 20 anesthesia services was 0.88%, compared to the average annual inflation at 2.06%., Conclusions: Average Medicare payment for common anesthesia services after adjusting for inflation have decreased from 2000 to 2020, consistent with findings in other physician specialties. Understanding these trends is important for practice viability and suggests significant financial implications for anesthesia practices and hospitals if the trend were to continue., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To use time driven activity-based costing to characterize the provider cost of rapid MRI for appendicitis compared to other MRI examinations billed with the same Current Procedural Terminology codes commonly used for MRI appendicitis examinations., Methods: Rapid MRI appendicitis examination was compared with MRI pelvis without intravenous contrast, MRI abdomen/pelvis without intravenous contrast, and MRI abdomen/pelvis with intravenous contrast. Process maps for each examination were created through direct shadowing of patient procedures (n = 20) and feedback from relevant health care professionals. Additional data were collected from the electronic medical record for 327 MRI examinations. Practical capacity cost rates were calculated for personnel, equipment, and facilities. The cost of each step was calculated by multiplying the capacity cost rate with the mean duration of each step. Stepwise costs were summed to generate a total cost for each MRI examination., Results: The mean duration and costs for MRI examination type were as follows: MRI appendicitis: 11 (range: 6-25) min, $20.03 (7.80-44.24); MRI pelvis without intravenous contrast: 55 (29-205) min, $105.99 (64.18-285.13); MRI abdomen/pelvis without intravenous contrast: 65 (26-173) min, $144.83 (61.16-196.50); MRI abdomen/pelvis with intravenous contrast: 128 (39-303) min, $236.99 (102.62-556.54)., Conclusion: The estimated cost of providing a rapid appendicitis MRI examination is significantly less than other MRI examinations billed using Current Procedural Terminology codes typically used for appendicitis MRI. Mechanisms to appropriately bill rapid MRI examinations with limited sequences are needed to improve cost efficiency for the patient and to enable wider use of limited MRI examinations in the pediatric population., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Gender-affirming top surgery is becoming increasingly common, with greater diversity in the patients receiving top surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine national trends in patient demographics, characteristics, wound complication rates, and concurrent procedures in patients receiving gender-affirming top surgeries., Methods: Patients with gender dysphoria who underwent breast procedures, including mastectomy, mastopexy, breast augmentation, or breast reduction by a plastic surgeon between 2013 and 2022, were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. These procedures were considered to be gender-affirming "top surgery." Univariate analyses were performed to examine trend changes in the patient population and types of additional procedures performed over the last decade., Results: There was a 38-fold increase in the number of patients who received top surgery during the most recent years compared to the first 2 years of the decade. Significantly more individuals receiving top surgery in recent years were nonbinary ( P < 0.01). There was a significant decrease in percentage of active smokers ( P < 0.01) while there was an increase in percentage of patients with diabetes ( P = 0.03). While there was a significant increase in the number of obese patients receiving top surgery ( P < 0.01), there were no differences in postoperative wound complications between the years. Significantly more patients received additional procedures ( P < 0.01) and had about a 9-fold increase in distinct number of additional CPT codes from 2013-2014 to 2021-2022., Conclusions: Our study found that there has been (1) a significant increase in the number of top surgery patients from 2013 to 2022 overall and (2) a particular increase in patients with preoperative comorbidities, such as a higher body mass index and diabetes. Understanding current and evolving trends in patients undergoing surgical treatment for gender dysphoria can inform individualized care plans that best serve the needs of patients and optimize overall outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nerve transfers represent a new paradigm in the treatment of nerve injuries. Their current level of adoption among surgeons is unknown. This study evaluates the incidence of nerve transfers on case logs of board-eligible plastic surgeons over the past 14 years and surveys practicing nerve surgeons regarding their use of this technique., Methods: We queried the American Board of Plastic Surgery case log database for all nerve reconstruction Current Procedural Terminology codes from 2008 to 2021 and assessed trends and relationships between geographic region, examination year, and nerve transfer use. We surveyed nerve surgery professional societies to assess trends in practice, compared with a 2017 survey., Results: A total of 1959 nerve reconstruction cases were logged by 738 candidates from 2008 to 2021. Twelve percent of cases included nerve transfers. The proportion of nerve transfer codes ( Z = -11.57; P < .0001) and the proportion of candidates performing nerve transfers ( Z = -9.21, P < .0001) increased over the study period. Nerve transfers were associated with geographic region (χ 2 = 25.826, P = .0002), with most cases performed in the Midwest (26.4%). A higher proportion of practicing nerve surgeons reported performing nerve transfers in this survey than in our 2017 survey (χ 2 = 16.7, P < .001)., Conclusions: There has been an increase in nerve transfers logged in the past 14 years by board-eligible plastic surgeons, as well as increased use among currently practicing nerve surgeons. Although nerve transfer use is increasing among both plastic and orthopedic surgeons, a greater proportion of nerve reconstructions include nerve transfers in the plastic surgery cohort., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Revision total hip arthroplasties (THA) are time-consuming, expensive, and technically challenging. Today's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and relative value units (RVU) may in fact disincentivize surgeons to perform revision THAs. Our study reviewed labor and time investments for each component-specific revision THA and analyzed the gap between procedural value billed and final reimbursement.Methods: A retrospective review of 165 primary and revision THAs were validated using operative notes and billing records. We stratified revision THAs by standard CPT coding (with modifiers) as single acetabular component, single femoral component, femoral head plus polyethylene liner (head/liner) exchange, all-components, and spacer placement for infection. Operative time, RVUs, total charges, deductions, and final reimbursement data was collected. Mann-Whitney U tests studied final reimbursement per minute vs per RVU in revision and primary THAs.Results: Our cohort consisted of 27 primary THAs, 26 acetabular component revisions, 32 head/liner exchanges, 26 femoral component revisions, 27 all-component revisions, and 27 spacer placements. Compared to primary THAs, every revision subgroup except for head/liner exchanges were found to reimburse less per minute and all revision subgroups reimbursed less per RVU (P < .05).Conclusion: Physicians face less reimbursement per minute and per RVU for revision THAs. With cuts in reimbursement set forth by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and insurers, revisions may be financially unfavorable. This ultimately will lead to an impending access to care problem in the future. Our study supports the need to re-examine the RVU allocation amongst revision THAs and evaluate changes to the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Revision total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are costly, time-intensive, and technically demanding procedures. There are concerns regarding the valuation of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and the assigned relative value units (RVU) as a potential disincentive to perform revision TKAs. This study evaluated the labor and time investment for each component-specific revision and assessed the disparities between procedural value billed and reimbursement.Methods: A retrospective review of 154 primary and revision TKA cases were thoroughly vetted using operative notes and internal billing data. Revision TKAs were stratified by single femoral component, single tibial component, polyethylene liner only, all-component, and spacer placement for prosthetic infection. Operative time, RVUs billed, total charges, deductions, and reimbursements were recorded. Mann-Whitney U tests compared final reimbursement per minute and per RVU between revision and primary TKAs.Results: There were 28 primary TKAs, 11 femoral component revisions, 25 tibial component revisions, 25 liner exchanges, 37 all-component revisions, and 28 spacer placements. Revisions involving the tibial component, all-components, and placement of spacers were reimbursed less dollars per minute than primary TKAs (P < .05). Controlling for RVUs, liner exchanges and all-component revisions had fewer dollars per RVU than primary TKAs (P < .05).Conclusion: As revision complexity increases, physicians face less reimbursement per minute and per RVU. With reductions set by CMS and private insurers, revisions may be financially unfavorable and lead to restrictions and access to care problems. Our data supports the need for reevaluating RVU allocation amongst revision procedures with potential updates to the CPT coding system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vascular access (VA) is essential to inpatient care, and the documentation/coding practices for vascular access device (VAD) placement procedures remain unexplored. Accurate documentation may present benefits for patients, providers, and researchers. A retrospective analysis was performed in adult inpatients (2015 to 2020) using Cerner Real World Data™ to evaluate the utilization of CPT codes for VAD placement/replacement procedures. A total of 14,253,584 patient encounters were analyzed, 0.111 percent (n=15,833) of which received at least one VAD procedure code. Non-tunneled CVC procedures had the highest code rate (0.067 percent), while PIV/midline procedures were the least likely to be coded (0.004 percent). The annual proportion of code utilization increased from 10.9 percent in 2015 to 19.7 percent in 2020 (p<0.0001). Despite widespread use of VADs in the inpatient setting, the procedure coding rate was found to be remarkably low. Appropriate coding/documentation practices may ensure proper care by capturing VA-related patient history, and improve research quality and resource/staff allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Ambiguity exists defining abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) and associated Current Procedural Terminology code usage in the context of ventral hernia repair (VHR), especially with recent adoption of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted AWR techniques. Current guidelines have not accounted for the spectrum of repair complexity and have relied on expert opinion. This study aimed to develop an evidence-based definition and coding algorithm for AWR based on myofascial releases performed. Methods: Three vignettes and associated outcomes were evaluated in adult patients who underwent elecive VHR with mesh between 2013 and 2020 in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative including: (1) no myofascial release (NR), (2) posterior rectus sheath myofascial release (PRS), and (3) PRS with transversus abdominis release or external oblique release (PRS-TA/EO). The primary outcome measure was operative time based on the following categories (min): 0–59, 60–119, 120–179, 180–239, and 240 + ; secondary outcomes included disease severity measures and 30-day postoperative outcomes. Results: 15,246 patients were included: 7287(NR), 2425(PRS), and 5534(PRS-TA/EO). Operative time increased based on myofascial releases performed: 180–239 min (p < 0.05): NR(5%), PRS(23%), PRS-TA/EO(28%) and greater than 240 min (p < 0.05): NR (4%), PRS (17%), PRS-TA/EO(44%). A dose–response effect was observed for all secondary outcome measures indicative of three distinct levels of patient complexity and outcomes for each of the three vignettes. Conclusion: AWR is defined as VHR including myofascial release. Coding for AWR should reflect the actual effort used to manage these patients. We propose an evidence-based approach to AWR coding that focuses on myofascial release and is inclusive of minimally invasive techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine the positive predictive value (PPV) of algorithms to identify patients with major (at the ankle or more proximal) lower extremity amputation (LEA) using Department of Veterans Affairs electronic medical records (EMR) and to evaluate whether PPV varies by sex, age, and race. Design: We conducted a validation study comparing EMR determined LEA status to self-reported LEA (criterion standard). Setting: Veterans who receive care at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Participants: We invited a national sample of patients (N=699) with at least 1 procedure or diagnosis code for major LEA to participate. We oversampled women, Black men, and men ≤40 years of age. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: We calculated PPV estimates and false negative percentages for 7 algorithms using EMR LEA procedure and diagnosis codes relative to self-reported major LEA. Results: A total of 466 veterans self-reported their LEA status (68%). PPVs for the 7 algorithms ranged from 89% to 100%. The algorithm that required a single diagnosis or procedure code had the lowest PPV (89%). The algorithm that required at least 1 procedure code had the highest PPV (100%) but also had the highest proportion of false negatives (66%). Algorithms that required at least 1 procedure code or 2 or more diagnosis codes 1 month to 1 year apart had high PPVs (98%-99%) but varied in terms of false negative percentages. PPV estimates were higher among men than women but did not differ meaningfully by age or race, after accounting for sex. Conclusion: PPVs were higher if 1 procedure or at least 2 diagnosis codes were required; the difference between algorithms was marked by sex. Investigators should consider trade-offs between PPV and false negatives to identify patients with LEA using EMRs.

Background: Pathology reports serve as an auditable trial of a patient’s clinical narrative, containing text pertaining to diagnosis, prognosis, and specimen processing. Recent works have utilized natural language processing (NLP) pipelines, which include rule-based or machine-learning analytics, to uncover textual patterns that inform clinical endpoints and biomarker information. Although deep learning methods have come to the forefront of NLP, there have been limited comparisons with the performance of other machine-learning methods in extracting key insights for the prediction of medical procedure information, which is used to inform reimbursement for pathology departments. In addition, the utility of combining and ranking information from multiple report subfields as compared with exclusively using the diagnostic field for the prediction of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and signing pathologists remains unclear. Methods: After preprocessing pathology reports, we utilized advanced topic modeling to identify topics that characterize a cohort of 93,039 pathology reports at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (DPLM). We separately compared XGBoost, SVM, and BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representation from Transformers) methodologies for the prediction of primary CPT codes (CPT 88302, 88304, 88305, 88307, 88309) as well as 38 ancillary CPT codes, using both the diagnostic text alone and text from all subfields. We performed similar analyses for characterizing text from a group of the 20 pathologists with the most pathology report sign-outs. Finally, we uncovered important report subcomponents by using model explanation techniques. Results: We identified 20 topics that pertained to diagnostic and procedural information. Operating on diagnostic text alone, BERT outperformed XGBoost for the prediction of primary CPT codes. When utilizing all report subfields, XGBoost outperformed BERT for the prediction of primary CPT codes. Utilizing additional subfields of the pathology report increased prediction accuracy across ancillary CPT codes, and performance gains for using additional report subfields were high for the XGBoost model for primary CPT codes. Misclassifications of CPT codes were between codes of a similar complexity, and misclassifications between pathologists were subspecialty related. Conclusions: Our approach generated CPT code predictions with an accuracy that was higher than previously reported. Although diagnostic text is an important source of information, additional insights may be extracted from other report subfields. Although BERT approaches performed comparably to the XGBoost approaches, they may lend valuable information to pipelines that combine image, text, and -omics information. Future resource-saving opportunities exist to help hospitals detect mis-billing, standardize report text, and estimate productivity metrics that pertain to pathologist compensation (RVUs).

Background: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) uses Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for risk-adjusted calculations. This study evaluates the inter-rater reliability of coding colorectal resections across Canada by ACS-NSQIP surgical clinical nurse reviewers (SCNR) and its impact on risk predictions., Methods: SCNRs in Canada were asked to code simulated operative reports. Percent agreement and free-marginal kappa correlation were calculated. The ACS-NSQIP risk calculator was utilized to illustrate its impact on risk prediction., Results: Responses from 44 of 150 (29.3 ​%) SCNRs revealed 3 to 6 different codes chosen per case, with agreement ranging from 6.7 ​% to 62.3 ​%. Free-marginal kappa correlation ranged from moderate agreement (0.53) to high disagreement (-0.17). ACS-NSQIP risk calculator predicted large absolute differences in risk for serious complications (0.2 ​%-13.7 ​%) and mortality (0.2 ​%-6.3 ​%)., Conclusion: This study demonstrated low inter-rater reliability in coding ACS-NSQIP colorectal procedures in Canada among SCNRs, impacting risk predictions., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: retrospective study., Objective: To investigate the incidence of all-cause revision surgery between plated vs stand-alone cage constructs for single level ACDF., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a commercial insurance claims database. Patients 18-65 years-old were included if they underwent single-level inpatient ACDF (defined with CPT codes) from 2010 - 2018, with a minimum of 2-year continuous insurance enrollment. The primary independent variable was the use of anterior plating vs zero profile device or stand-alone cage. Synthetic (ie, metal, PEEK, etc.) vs allograft interbody was a secondary independent variable. The primary outcome variable was revision cervical arthrodesis after the index operation., Results: In total, 21092 patients undergoing single-level inpatient ACDF were included. 10.0% received a stand-alone cage during the index operation. Mean follow-up duration was 4.5 years. Revision arthrodesis occurred in 8.2% of patients overall, at a mean of 2.4 years after the index surgery. Patients with anterior plating had a lower rate of all-cause revision surgery in unadjusted (overall rate 8.1% vs 9.6%, P = 0.0185) and adjusted analysis (OR 0.78, P = 0.0016) vs stand-alone cages. Patients with stand-alone cages had higher rates of revision with a posterior approach than did patients with plated constructs. In sub-analysis, the combination of a stand-alone interbody device with an allograft had significantly higher odds of revision than other combinations of devices., Conclusion: Among commercially insured patients ≤65 years-old undergoing single-level ACDF, anterior plating was associated with a reduced incidence of revision surgery compared to stand-alone cages within the follow up period of our study., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Introduction: Although hip arthroscopy continues to be one of the most used arthroscopic procedures, no focused, comprehensive evaluation of reimbursement trends has been conducted. The purpose of this study was to analyze the temporal Medicare reimbursement trends for hip arthroscopy procedures., Methods: From 2011 to 2021, the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool was queried for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes related to hip arthroscopy (29860 to 29863, 29914 to 29916). All monetary data were adjusted to 2021 US dollars. The compound annual growth rate and total percentage change were calculated. Mann-Kendall trend tests were used to evaluate the reimbursement trends., Results: Based on the unadjusted values, a significant increase in physician fee was observed from 2011 to 2021 for CPT codes 29861 (removal of loose or foreign bodies; % change: 3.49, P = 0.03) and 29862 (chondroplasty, abrasion arthroplasty, labral resection; % change: 3.19, P = 0.03). The remaining CPT codes experienced no notable changes in reimbursement based on the unadjusted values. After adjusting for inflation, all seven of the hip arthroscopy CPT codes were observed to experience a notable decline in Medicare reimbursement. Hip arthroscopy with acetabuloplasty (CPT: 29915) and labral repair (CPT: 29916) exhibited the greatest reduction in reimbursement with a decrease in physician fee of 24.69% ( P < 0.001) and 24.64% ( P < 0.001), respectively, over the study period., Discussion: Medicare reimbursement for all seven of the commonly used hip arthroscopy services did not keep up with inflation, demonstrating marked reductions from 2011 to 2021. Specifically, the inflation-adjusted reimbursements decreased between 19.23% and 24.69% between 2011 and 2021., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Background: The 22-modifier requests additional compensation for increased case complexity. Unfortunately, there is little to guide physicians on the application, which may increase successful reimbursement. We sought to evaluate various factors affecting reimbursement of the 22-modifier in primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and report which factors contributed to successful utilization., Methods: In this retrospective study, all cases from a single practice where the 22-modifier was added to Current Procedural Terminology codes: 27130 (total hip arthroplasty) and 27447 (total knee arthroplasty) from October 2018 to March 2022 were evaluated. Out of the 6,869 total cases performed, 816 22-modifier cases were identified (11.9%). Operative reports, demographics, insurance type, billing information, and clinical records were assessed. T-tests were used to determine statistical significance., Results: Of the 816 cases, 221 (27.1%) were successfully reimbursed. Cases justified 22-modifier application with obesity, anatomic variations, or intraoperative factors. Some cases lacked justification, or operative reports were not submitted. Reimbursement was successful for 27.6% of obesity cases, 29.7% of intraoperative complications, and 35.7% of anatomic variations. There was a significantly higher likelihood of Medicare reimbursement than third-party payers or Medicaid (69.6 versus 20.5 and 6.9%) (P < .0001). Additionally, Medicare was more likely to reimburse for obesity (76.6 versus 20.0, and 5.2%), anatomic variations (77.3 versus 22.0%), and intraoperative factors (66.6 versus 21.1, and 1.7%)., Conclusions: Reimbursement for 22-modifier cases in TJA is unlikely. Obesity was cited for most 22-modifier justifications, but anatomic variation justification was successfully reimbursed most often. Medicare was most likely to reimburse compared to third-party payers or Medicaid. These findings should be considered when applying a 22-modifier to TJA procedures., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The concept of "time toxicity" has emerged to address the impact of time spent in the healthcare system; however, little work has examined the phenomenon in the field of otolaryngology., Objective: To validate the use of Evaluation and Management (E/M) current procedural terminology codes as a method to assess time burden and to pilot this tool to characterize the time toxicity of office visits associated with a diagnosis of pituitary adenoma between 2016 and 2019., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of outpatient office visits quantified differences between timestamps documenting visit length and their associated E/M code visit length. The IBM MarketScan database was queried to identify patients with a diagnosis of pituitary adenoma in 2016 and to analyze their new and return claims between 2016 and 2019. One-way ANOVA and two-sample t-tests were used to examine claim quantity, time in office, and yearly visit time., Results: In the validation study, estimated visit time via E/M codes and actual visit time were statistically different ( P  < 0.01), with E/M codes underestimating actual time spent in 79.0% of visits. In the MarketScan analysis, in 2016, 2099 patients received a primary diagnosis of pituitary adenoma. There were 8490 additional-related claims for this cohort from 2016 to 2019. The plurality of new office visits were with endocrinologists (n = 857; 29.3%). Total time spent in office decreased yearly, from a mean of 113 min (2016) to 69 min (2019) ( P  < 0.001)., Conclusions: E/M codes underestimate the length of outpatient visits; therefore, time toxicity experienced by pituitary patients may be greater than reported. Further studies are needed to develop additional assessment tools for time toxicity and promote increased efficiency of care for patients with pituitary adenomas., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The purpose of this study was to describe the diagnoses and chiropractic services performed by doctors of chiropractic operating within 3 military treatment facilities for patients with low back pain (LBP). This was a descriptive secondary analysis of a pragmatic clinical trial comparing usual medical care (UMC) plus chiropractic care to UMC alone for U.S. active-duty military personnel with LBP. Participants who were allocated to receive UMC plus 6 weeks of chiropractic care and who attended at least 1 chiropractic visit (n = 350; 1547 unique visits) were included in this analysis. International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology codes were transcribed from chiropractic treatment paper forms. The number of participants receiving each diagnosis and service and the number of each service on unique visits was tabulated. Low back pain and co-occurring diagnoses were grouped into neuropathic, nociceptive, bone and/or joint, general pain, and nonallopathic lesions categories. Services were categorized as evaluation, active interventions, and passive interventions. The most reported pain diagnoses were lumbalgia (66.1%) and thoracic pain (6.6%). Most reported neuropathic pain diagnoses were sciatica (4.9%) and lumbosacral neuritis or radiculitis (2.9%). For the nociceptive pain, low back sprain and/or strain (15.8%) and lumbar facet syndrome (9.2%) were most common. Most reported diagnoses in the bone and/or joint category were intervertebral disc degeneration (8.6%) and spondylosis (6.0%). Tobacco use disorder (5.7%) was the most common in the other category. Chiropractic care was compromised of passive interventions (94%), with spinal manipulative therapy being the most common, active interventions (77%), with therapeutic exercise being most common, and a combination of passive and active interventions (72%). For the sample in this study, doctors of chiropractic within 3 military treatment facilities diagnosed, managed, and provided clinical evaluations for a range of LBP conditions. Although spinal manipulation was the most commonly used modality, chiropractic care included a multimodal approach, comprising of both active and passive interventions a majority of the time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Second-opinion pathology review identifies clinically significant diagnostic discrepancies for some patients. Discrepancy rates and laboratory-specific costs in a single health care system for patients referred from regional affiliates to a comprehensive cancer center ("main campus") have not been reported.Methods: Main campus second-opinion pathology cases for 740 patients from eight affiliated hospitals during 2016 to 2018 were reviewed. Chart review was performed to identify changes in care due to pathology review. To assess costs of pathology interpretation, reimbursement rates for consultation Current Procedural Terminology billing codes were compared with codes that would have been used had the cases originated at the main campus.Results: Diagnostic discrepancies were identified in 104 (14.1%) patients, 30 (4.1%) of which resulted in a change in care. In aggregate, reimbursement for affiliate cases was 65.6% of the reimbursement for the same cases had they originated at the main campus. High-volume organ systems with low relative consultation reimbursement included gynecologic, breast, and thoracic.Conclusions: Preventable diagnostic errors are reduced by pathology review for patients referred within a single health care system. Although the resulting changes in care potentially lead to overall cost savings, the financial value of referral pathology review could be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assessed 4045 ambulatory surgery patients for surgical site infection (SSI) using claims-based triggers for medical chart review. Of 98 patients flagged by codes suggestive of SSI, 35 had confirmed SSIs. SSI rates ranged from 0 to 3.2% for common procedures. Claims may be useful for SSI surveillance following ambulatory surgery.

Advanced interventional pulmonary procedures of the airways, pleural space, and mediastinum continue to evolve and be refined. Health care, finance, and clinical professionals are challenged by both the indications and related coding complexities. As the scope of interventional pulmonary procedures expands with advanced technique and medical innovation, program planning and ongoing collaboration among clinicians, finance executives, and reimbursement experts are key elements for success. We describe advanced bronchoscopic procedures, appropriate Current Procedural Terminology coding, valuations, and necessary modifiers to fill the knowledge gap between basic and advanced procedural coding. Our approach is to balance the description of procedures with the associated coding in a way that is of use to the proceduralist, the coding specialist, and other nonclinical professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Controversies currently exist regarding the best way to appropriately quantify complexity and to benchmark reimbursement for surgeons. This study aims to analyze surgeon reimbursement in primary and redo-thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy using operative time as a surrogate for complexity. A retrospective analysis using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was performed to identify patients who underwent primary and redo-thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy. Calculations of median operative time work relative value units per minute and dollars per minute were compared between primary and redo procedures. Thyroidectomy cases represented 53.5% (22,521 cases), and the other 46.5% (19,596 cases) were parathyroidectomy cases. The median dollars per minute in primary thyroidectomy was $4.97 and for redo-thyroidectomy was $8.12 (P < 0.0001). By the same token, dollars per minute were higher in the redo cases with $15.40 when compared with primary parathyroidectomy cases with $13.14 dollars per minute (P < 0.0001). By Current Procedural Terminology codes, surgeons appear to be appropriately reimbursed for redo-thyroid and parathyroid procedures indexed to first time parathyroidectomy based on the compensated operative time of these procedures calculated using a nationally representative sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although standardized terminologies such as the International Classification of Diseases have been in use in medicine for over a century, efforts in the dental profession to standardize dental diagnostic terms have not achieved widespread acceptance. To address this gap, a standardized dental diagnostic terminology, the EZCodes, was developed in 2009. Fifteen dental education institutions in the United States and Europe have implemented the EZCodes dental diagnostic terminology. This article reports on the utilization and valid entry of the EZCodes at three of the dental schools that have adopted this standardized dental diagnostic terminology. Electronic data on the use of procedure codes with diagnostic terms from the three schools over a period from July 2010 to June 2011 were aggregated. The diagnostic term and procedure code pairs were adjudicated by three calibrated dentists. Analyses were conducted to gain insight into the utilization and valid entry of the EZCodes diagnostic terminology in the one-year period. Error proportions in the entry of diagnostic term (and by diagnostic category) were also computed. In the twelve-month period, 29,965 diagnostic terms and 249,411 procedure codes were entered at the three institutions resulting in a utilization proportion of 12 percent. Caries and periodontics were the most frequently used categories. More than 1,000 of the available 1,321 diagnostic terms were never used. Overall, 60.5 percent of the EZCodes entries were found to be valid. The results demonstrate low utilization of EZCodes in an electronic health record and raise the need for specific training of dental providers on the importance of using dental diagnostic terminology and specifically how to use the terms in the electronic record. These findings will serve to increase the use/correct use of the EZCodes dental diagnostic terminology and ultimately create a reliable platform for undertaking clinical, outcomes, and quality improvement-related research.

Relative value units (RVUs) are a measurement of practice efficiency and patient complexity. RVUs are reviewed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through the Resource-Based Relative-Value Scale Update Committee, which determines recommendations regarding the Current Procedural Terminology code valuations for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. This article discusses the importance of nurses' participation in the accurate valuation of their work and in the process of developing and revising RVUs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic affected the utilization of various healthcare services differentially. Sleep testing services utilization (STU), including Home Sleep Apnea Testing (HSAT) and Polysomnography (PSG), were uniquely affected. We assessed the effects of the pandemic on STU and its recovery using the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data., Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study from the VHA between 01/2019 and 10/2023 of veterans with age ≥ 50. We extracted STU data using Current Procedural Terminology codes for five periods based on STU and vaccination status: pre-pandemic (Pre-Pan), pandemic sleep test moratorium (Pan-Mor), and pandemic pre-vaccination (Pan-Pre-Vax), vaccination (Pan-Vax), and postvaccination (Pan-Post-Vax). We compared STU between intervals (Pre-Pan as the reference)., Results: Among 261,371 veterans (63.7±9.6 years, BMI 31.9±6.0 kg/m², 80% male), PSG utilization decreased significantly during Pan-Mor (-56%), Pan-Pre-Vax (-61%), Pan-Vax (-42%), and Pan-Post-Vax (-36%) periods all compared to Pre-Pan. HSAT utilization decreased significantly during the Pan-Mor (-59%) and Pan-Pre-Vax (-9%) phases compared to the Pre-Pan and subsequently increased during Pan-Vax (+6%) and Pan-Post-Vax (-1%) periods. Over 70% of STU transitioned to HSAT, and its usage surged five months after the vaccine Introduction., Conclusion: Sleep testing services utilization recovered differentially during the pandemic (PSG vs HSAT), including a surge in HSAT utilization post-vaccination., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Ramezani et al.)