Lorraine T Dean1, Madeline C Montgomery2, Julia Raifman3, Amy Nunn4, Thomas Bertrand5, Alexi Almonte2, Philip A Chan6. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: ldean9@jhu.edu. 2. Division of Infectious Diseases, The Miriam Hospital, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 3. Department of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island. 5. Rhode Island Department of Health, Providence, Rhode Island. 6. Division of Infectious Diseases, The Miriam Hospital, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; Rhode Island Department of Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Sexually transmitted diseases continue to increase in the U.S. There is a growing need for financially viable models to ensure the longevity of safety-net sexually transmitted disease clinics, which provide testing and treatment to high-risk populations. This micro-costing analysis estimated the number of visits required to balance cost and revenue of a sexually transmitted disease clinic in a Medicaid expansion state. METHODS: In 2017, actual and projected cost and revenues were estimated from the Rhode Island sexually transmitted disease clinic in 2015. Projected revenues for a hypothetical clinic offering a standard set of sexually transmitted disease services were based on Medicaid; private ("commercial") insurance; and institutional ("list price") reimbursement rates. The number of visits needed to cover clinic costs at each rate was assessed. RESULTS: Total operating cost for 2,153 clinic visits was estimated at $255,769, or $119 per visit. Laboratory testing and salaries each accounted for 44% of operating costs, medications for treatment 7%, supplies 5%, and 28% of visits used insurance. For a standard clinic offering a basic set of sexually transmitted disease services to break even, a projected 73% of visits need to be covered at the Medicaid rate, 38% at private rate, or 11% at institutional rate. CONCLUSIONS: Sexually transmitted disease clinics may be financially viable when a majority of visits are billed at a Medicaid rate; however, mixed private/public models may be needed if not all visits are billed. In this manner, sexually transmitted disease clinics can be solvent even if not all visits are billed to insurance, thus ensuring access to uninsured or underinsured patients.
INTRODUCTION: Sexually transmitted diseases continue to increase in the U.S. There is a growing need for financially viable models to ensure the longevity of safety-net sexually transmitted disease clinics, which provide testing and treatment to high-risk populations. This micro-costing analysis estimated the number of visits required to balance cost and revenue of a sexually transmitted disease clinic in a Medicaid expansion state. METHODS: In 2017, actual and projected cost and revenues were estimated from the Rhode Island sexually transmitted disease clinic in 2015. Projected revenues for a hypothetical clinic offering a standard set of sexually transmitted disease services were based on Medicaid; private ("commercial") insurance; and institutional ("list price") reimbursement rates. The number of visits needed to cover clinic costs at each rate was assessed. RESULTS: Total operating cost for 2,153 clinic visits was estimated at $255,769, or $119 per visit. Laboratory testing and salaries each accounted for 44% of operating costs, medications for treatment 7%, supplies 5%, and 28% of visits used insurance. For a standard clinic offering a basic set of sexually transmitted disease services to break even, a projected 73% of visits need to be covered at the Medicaid rate, 38% at private rate, or 11% at institutional rate. CONCLUSIONS: Sexually transmitted disease clinics may be financially viable when a majority of visits are billed at a Medicaid rate; however, mixed private/public models may be needed if not all visits are billed. In this manner, sexually transmitted disease clinics can be solvent even if not all visits are billed to insurance, thus ensuring access to uninsured or underinsured patients.
Authors: Madeline C Montgomery; Julia Raifman; Amy S Nunn; Thomas Bertrand; A Ziggy Uvin; Theodore Marak; Jaime Comella; Alexi Almonte; Philip A Chan Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Nicky J Mehtani; Christina M Schumacher; Luke E Johnsen; Joneigh S Khaldun; C Patrick Chaulk; Khalil G Ghanem; Jacky M Jennings; Kathleen R Page Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: C L Celum; G Bolan; M Krone; K Code; P Leone; C Spaulding; K Henry; P Clarke; M Smith; E W Hook Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Kwame Owusu-Edusei; Harrell W Chesson; Thomas L Gift; Guoyu Tao; Reena Mahajan; Marie Cheryl Bañez Ocfemia; Charlotte K Kent Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Karen W Hoover; Bradley W Parsell; Jami S Leichliter; Melissa A Habel; Guoyu Tao; William S Pearson; Thomas L Gift Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Godfather Dickson Kimaro; Sayoki Mfinanga; Victoria Simms; Sokoine Kivuyo; Christian Bottomley; Neil Hawkins; Thomas S Harrison; Shabbar Jaffar; Lorna Guinness Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240