Lesli E Skolarus1, James F Burke1, Brian C Callaghan1, Amanda Becker1, Kevin A Kerber2. 1. From the Health Services Research Program (L.E.S., J.F.B., B.C.C., K.A.K.), Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; and the American Academy of Neurology (A.B.), Minneapolis, MN. 2. From the Health Services Research Program (L.E.S., J.F.B., B.C.C., K.A.K.), Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; and the American Academy of Neurology (A.B.), Minneapolis, MN. kakerber@umich.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how neurology payments vary by service type (i.e., evaluation and management [E/M] vs tests/treatments) and compare to other specialties, yet this information is necessary to help neurology define its position on proposed payment reform. METHODS: Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from 2012 were used. These data included all direct payments to providers who care for fee-for-service Medicare recipients. Total payment was determined by medical specialty and for various services (e.g., E/M, EEG, electromyography/nerve conduction studies, polysomnography) within neurology. Payment and proportion of services were then calculated across neurologists' payment categories. RESULTS: Neurologists comprised 1.5% (12,317) of individual providers who received Medicare payments and were paid $1.15 billion by Medicare in 2012. Sixty percent ($686 million) of the Medicare payment to neurologists was for E/M, which was a lower proportion than primary providers (approximately 85%) and higher than surgical subspecialties (range 9%-51%). The median neurologist received nearly 75% of their payments from E/M. Two-thirds of neurologists received 60% or more of their payment from E/M services and over 20% received all of their payment from E/M services. Neurologists in the highest payment category performed more services, of which a lower proportion were E/M, and performed at a facility, compared to neurologists in lower payment categories. CONCLUSION: E/M is the dominant source of payment to the majority of neurologists and should be prioritized by neurology in payment restructuring efforts.
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how neurology payments vary by service type (i.e., evaluation and management [E/M] vs tests/treatments) and compare to other specialties, yet this information is necessary to help neurology define its position on proposed payment reform. METHODS: Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from 2012 were used. These data included all direct payments to providers who care for fee-for-service Medicare recipients. Total payment was determined by medical specialty and for various services (e.g., E/M, EEG, electromyography/nerve conduction studies, polysomnography) within neurology. Payment and proportion of services were then calculated across neurologists' payment categories. RESULTS: Neurologists comprised 1.5% (12,317) of individual providers who received Medicare payments and were paid $1.15 billion by Medicare in 2012. Sixty percent ($686 million) of the Medicare payment to neurologists was for E/M, which was a lower proportion than primary providers (approximately 85%) and higher than surgical subspecialties (range 9%-51%). The median neurologist received nearly 75% of their payments from E/M. Two-thirds of neurologists received 60% or more of their payment from E/M services and over 20% received all of their payment from E/M services. Neurologists in the highest payment category performed more services, of which a lower proportion were E/M, and performed at a facility, compared to neurologists in lower payment categories. CONCLUSION: E/M is the dominant source of payment to the majority of neurologists and should be prioritized by neurology in payment restructuring efforts.
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Brian C Callaghan; James F Burke; Lesli E Skolarus; Chloe E Hill; Brandon Magliocco; Gregory J Esper; Kevin A Kerber Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Chloe E Hill; Evan L Reynolds; James F Burke; Mousumi Banerjee; Kevin A Kerber; Brandon Magliocco; Gregory J Esper; Lesli E Skolarus; Brian C Callaghan Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 9.910