Literature DB >> 33771412

A Cross-Sectional Analysis of High-Acuity Professional Services Performed by Urban and Rural Emergency Care Physicians Across the United States.

Cameron J Gettel1, Maureen E Canavan2, Margaret B Greenwood-Ericksen3, Vivek L Parwani4, Andrew S Ulrich4, Randy L Pilgrim5, Arjun K Venkatesh6.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: We seek to examine differences in the provision of high-acuity professional services between rural and urban physicians receiving reimbursement for emergency care evaluation and management services from Medicare fee-for-service Part B.
METHODS: Using the 2017 Medicare Public Use Files, we performed a cross-sectional analysis and defined the primary outcome, the proportion of high-acuity charts (PHAC), at the physician level as the proportion of services provided as 99285 and 99291 emergency care evaluation and management service codes relative to all such codes. After accounting for unique clinician-level characteristics, we categorized individual physicians by PHAC quintiles and conducted ordered logistic regression analyses reporting adjusted marginal probabilities to examine associations with rurality.
RESULTS: A total of 34,256 physicians providing emergency care had a median PHAC of 66.8% (interquartile range 55.6% to 75.7%), with 89.2% practicing in an urban setting. Urban and rural physicians had respective median PHACs of 67.6% (interquartile range 57.1% to 76.2%) and 57.9% (interquartile range 42.7% to 69.4%). Urban and rural physicians had respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 15.2% and 11.8% of being in the highest PHAC quintile, and respective adjusted marginal probabilities of 14.3% and 18.2% of being in the lowest PHAC quintile.
CONCLUSION: In comparison with rural physicians, urban physicians providing emergency care received reimbursements for a greater PHAC when caring for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Policymakers must consider these differences in the design and implementation of new emergency care payment policies.
Copyright © 2020 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33771412      PMCID: PMC8238845          DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2020.11.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   6.762


  18 in total

1.  Rural Medicare Beneficiaries Have Fewer Follow-up Visits and Greater Emergency Department Use Postdischarge.

Authors:  Matthew Toth; Mark Holmes; Courtney Van Houtven; Mark Toles; Morris Weinberger; Pam Silberman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Nurse practitioners and physician assistants in emergency medical services who billed independently, 2012-2016.

Authors:  Ge Bai; Gabor D Kelen; Kevin D Frick; Gerard F Anderson
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 2.469

3.  Measuring Emergency Department Acuity.

Authors:  Maame Yaa A B Yiadom; Christopher W Baugh; Tyler W Barrett; Xulei Liu; Alan B Storrow; Timothy J Vogus; Vikram Tiwari; Corey M Slovis; Stephan Russ; Dandan Liu
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 3.451

4.  Association of Coded Severity With Readmission Reduction After the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

Authors:  Andrew M Ibrahim; Justin B Dimick; Shashank S Sinha; John M Hollingsworth; Ushapoorna Nuliyalu; Andrew M Ryan
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  National Health Care Spending In 2018: Growth Driven By Accelerations In Medicare And Private Insurance Spending.

Authors:  Micah Hartman; Anne B Martin; Joseph Benson; Aaron Catlin
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 6.301

6.  Emergency severity index triage system correlation with emergency department evaluation and management billing codes and total professional charges.

Authors:  Jennifer L Wiler; Robert F Poirier; Heather Farley; William Zirkin; Richard T Griffey
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.451

7.  Association of Diagnosis Coding With Differences in Risk-Adjusted Short-term Mortality Between Critical Access and Non-Critical Access Hospitals.

Authors:  Cyrus M Kosar; Lacey Loomer; Kali S Thomas; Elizabeth M White; Orestis A Panagiotou; Momotazur Rahman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Marginal Effects-Quantifying the Effect of Changes in Risk Factors in Logistic Regression Models.

Authors:  Edward C Norton; Bryan E Dowd; Matthew L Maciejewski
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Using standardised patients to assess the quality of medical records: an application and evidence from rural China.

Authors:  Yuju Wu; Huan Zhou; Xiao Ma; Yaojiang Shi; Hao Xue; Chengchao Zhou; Hongmei Yi; Alexis Medina; Jason Li; Sean Sylvia
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 7.035

10.  Are trends in billing for high-intensity emergency care explained by changes in services provided in the emergency department? An observational study among US Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Laura G Burke; Robert C Wild; E John Orav; Renee Y Hsia
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  1 in total

1.  The 2013 to 2019 Emergency Medicine Workforce: Clinician Entry and Attrition Across the US Geography.

Authors:  Cameron J Gettel; D Mark Courtney; Alexander T Janke; Craig Rothenberg; Angela M Mills; Wendy Sun; Arjun K Venkatesh
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 6.762

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.