A field guide to U.S. healthcare reform: The evolution to value-based healthcare.

OBJECTIVE: A consolidated state-of-the-art review of U.S. healthcare reform efforts that documents the evolution towards value-based healthcare (VBH) is lacking in peer-review literature. This field guide attempts to clarify working definitions and conceptual boundaries within the lexicon of U.S. healthcare reform efforts that predated and have common thematic perspectives within the evolving VBH reform paradigm. DATA SOURCES: Pubmed/MEDLINE/Google search. REVIEW METHODS: Pubmed/MEDLINE/Google search was performed during August 1, 2020-January14, 2021 for U.S. healthcare reform terms, legislative and government agency publications. Those citing relevant legislative, regulatory, philosophical and technological advancements integral to the development and function of VBH were catalogued according to the targeted stakeholders and evolving reform strategy or technology. CONCLUSIONS: Eight healthcare reform paradigms were identified as influential precursors to VBH: Patient-Centered Care Model, Patient-Centered Medical Home, Population Health, Personalized Medicine, P4 Medicine, Precision Medicine, Managed Care, and Accountable Care. Several of these models have similar nomenclature and, confusingly, many have multiple interpretations of the terms used to describe these models. However, consistent stakeholders identified within these paradigms are key to VBH; notably the patient, the physician and the payer (the "Big 3"). Demonstrable healthcare spending reductions have been best achieved when the Big 3 stakeholder interests are aligned within healthcare reform legislation. The definition of "Value" within each reform model was found to be based upon the perspective of the targeted stakeholder. Within VBH, the perspectives of the Big 3 stakeholders form a multidimensional meaning of "Value" that can be represented by the equation Value = Patient Experience Management 3 .

Contemporary analysis of otolaryngic allergy.

OBJECTIVES: Investigate the current trends in otolaryngic allergy (OA). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. METHODS: Survey of active AAOA membership. RESULTS: Response rate was 27.3%. Regional response distribution rates were proportional to the AAOA membership distribution within the United States (R2 = 0.95; P < 0.001), with no significant regional response bias demonstrated (P = 0.428). Self-reported duration to OA competency was 5.8 years. Physicians reporting OA competency were more likely to be board-certified (P < 0.001) and have AAOA fellowship status (P < 0.001). The AAOA was reported to be the most valuable educational resource toward achieving OA competency, with residency training being least valuable (P < 0.001). 91.5% of respondents' practices offered OA services. Subcutaneous injections predominated at twice the utilization of sublingual immunotherapy. Allergy immunotherapy tablets were rarely utilized. Home allergy shots were offered by 45.2% of respondents. In-office immunotherapy vial compounding was preferred (95.8%) to third-party vendors. 94% of AAOA respondents identified patient compliance to be an issue within OA. Non-inhalant allergy service integration included food allergy (63.5%), asthma (44.9%), allergic fungal sinusitis (43.8%), penicillin allergy (18%), stinging insect allergy (12.6%), and aspirin desensitization (3.9%). CONCLUSION: Reported duration to OA competency after residency was surprisingly long. Further investigation of current and future educational/clinical training is warranted given clinical integration reported for OA. Otolaryngology is in the unique position to develop a comprehensive sino-allergy evidence-based strategy integrating the extensive diagnostic and medical treatment arms alongside the surgical expertise of the specialty within a clinical sino-allergy home concept. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Laryngoscope, 130:283-289, 2020.

Contemporary analysis of practicing otolaryngologists.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To investigate contemporary issues facing practicing otolaryngologists including workforce dynamics, ancillary service modeling, otolaryngic allergy integration, ambulatory surgery center utilization, and relevant certificate of need legislation. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey analysis of academic and private practicing otolaryngologists in North and South Carolina in 2016. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was e-mailed to 510 practicing otolaryngologists in North and South Carolina. RESULTS: A 21.3% survey response rate was achieved. Otolaryngology workforce was defined by horizontal aggregation of otolaryngologists into larger group models, with fewer solo practitioners being replaced by younger otolaryngologists or employing otolaryngology extenders. Excluding academic practice, few otolaryngologists have chosen direct hospital employment as a career option, although otolaryngologists with fewer years of practice are pursuing that option with greater frequency. Ancillary services showed audiology and hearing aid services being the most common, followed by otolaryngic allergy, point-of-service computed tomography, and ultrasound. Although otolaryngologists tend to avoid vertical integration, ambulatory surgery center (ASC) ownership trends favor a joint venture model with a hospital system partner. Most otolaryngologists favor changes to certificate of need legislation to improve patient access to these lower-cost facilities, regardless of whether they currently utilize or have access to an ASC. CONCLUSIONS: Otolaryngology is uniquely positioned to adapt and respond to current paradigm shifts within ambulatory medicine. Further analysis is needed to prepare current and future otolaryngologists for the demands and opportunities these challenges pose as patient-centered care models and consumer dynamics shape future patient expectations and utilization of healthcare. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5. Laryngoscope, 2490-2499, 2018.

Radiofrequency turbinate reduction: a NOSE evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The symptoms and treatments for nasal obstruction are numerous and common. Yet, a consensus on a surgical approach or, even more importantly, how to define the success of any approach is lacking in the literature. A disease-specific outcomes instrument recently developed by the American Academy of Otolaryngology, known as the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale, has allowed for a validated, uniform method to compare different treatments for nasal obstruction. METHODS: Using the NOSE scale, we prospectively compared the use of bilateral radiofrequency inferior turbinate reduction (BRITR) only with that of BRITR with septoplasty in the treatment of nasal obstruction caused by the combination of septal deviation and turbinate hypertrophy. NOSE scores were obtained pretreatment and at 3 month and 6 month follow-up. RESULTS: Our data demonstrated significant improvement from baseline after 6 months for the NOSE scores in both the BRITR (P < .001) and BRITR/septoplasty groups (P = .023). No statistical difference was noted in the amount of postoperative improvement between the two treatment groups (P = .304). Both groups did demonstrate a large, clinically important effect using a distribution-based assessment of clinical change. Despite equal clinically effective results, estimated costs for each treatment option differed significantly, with the office-based BRITR only group providing significant cost savings compared with the hospital-based BRITR/septoplasty group. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that BRITR should be considered as an initial treatment option for nasal obstruction rather than a septoplasty with turbinate reduction in patients with the clinical findings of both a septal deviation and turbinate hypertrophy after failure of medical therapy.