Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
JAMA ; 329(8): 662-669, 2023 02 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2273949

ABSTRACT

Importance: US primary care physicians (PCPs) have lower mean incomes than specialists, likely contributing to workforce shortages. In 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services increased payment for evaluation and management (E/M) services and relaxed documentation requirements. These changes may have reduced the gap between primary care and specialist payment. Objectives: To simulate the effect of the E/M payment policy change on total Medicare physician payments while holding volume constant and to compare these simulated changes with observed changes in total Medicare payments and E/M coding intensity, before (July-December 2020) and after (July-December 2021) the E/M payment policy change. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective observational study of US office-based physicians who were in specialties with 5000 or more physicians billing Medicare and who had 50 or more fee-for-service Medicare visits before and after the E/M payment policy change. Exposures: E/M payment policy changes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included physician-level simulated volume-constant payment change, total observed Medicare payment change, and share of high-intensity (ie, level 4 or 5) E/M visits before and after the E/M payment policy change. For each specialty, the median change in each outcome was reported. The payment gap between primary care and specialty physicians was calculated as the difference between total Medicare payments to the median primary care and median specialty physician. Results: The study population included 180 624 physicians. Repricing 2020 services yielded a simulated volume-constant payment change ranging from a 3.3% (-$4557.0) decrease for the median radiologist to an 11.0% ($3683.1) increase for the median family practice physician. After the E/M payment change, the median high-intensity share of E/M visits increased for physicians of nearly all specialties, ranging from a -4.4 percentage point increase (dermatology) to a 17.8 percentage point increase (psychiatry). The median change in total Medicare payments by specialty ranged from -4.2% (-$1782.9) for general surgery to 12.1% ($3746.9) for family practice. From July-December 2020 to July-December 2021, the payment gap between the median primary care physician and the median specialist shrank by $825.1, from $40 259.8 to $39 434.7 (primary care, $41 193.3 in July-December 2020 and $45 962.4 in July-December 2021; specialist, $81 453.1 in July-December 2020 and $85 397.1 in July-December 2021)-a relative decrease of 2.0%. Conclusions and Relevance: Among US office-based physicians receiving Medicare payments in 2020 and 2021, E/M payment policy changes were associated with changes in Medicare payment by specialty, although the payment gap between primary care physicians and specialists decreased only modestly. The findings may have been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, and further research in subsequent years is needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , General Practitioners , Psychiatry , Aged , United States , Humans , Pandemics , Medicare , Policy
3.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 40(8): 1321-1327, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337565

ABSTRACT

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, outpatient clinics throughout the US shifted toward virtual care to limit viral transmission in the office. However, as health care facilities have reopened, evidence about the risk of acquiring respiratory viral infections in medical office settings remains limited. To inform policy for reopening outpatient care settings, we analyzed rates of potential airborne disease transmission in medical office settings, focusing on influenza-like illness. We quantified whether exposed patients (that is, those seen in a medical office after a patient with influenza-like illness) were more likely to return with a similar illness in the next two weeks compared with nonexposed patients seen earlier in the day. Patients exposed to influenza-like illness in the medical office setting were more likely than nonexposed patients to revisit with a similar illness within two weeks (adjusted absolute difference: 0.7 per 1,000 patients). Similar patterns were not observed for exposure to urinary tract infection and back pain as noncontagious control conditions. These results highlight the potential threat of reopening outpatient clinics during the pandemic and the value of virtual visits for patients with suspected respiratory infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections , Humans , Infection Control , Outpatients , Pandemics , Physicians' Offices , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL