Impact of High-Deductible Health Plans on Breast Reconstruction: Considerations for Financial Toxicity.

BACKGROUND: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are used within the United States to curb unnecessary health care spending; however, the resulting increased out-of-pocket (OOP) costs may be associated with financial toxicity. The aim was to assess the impact of HDHPs on use and seasonality of mastectomy and breast reconstruction procedures. The hypothesis is that the high OOP costs of HDHPs will lead to decreased overall service use and greater fourth-quarter use after the deductible has been met. METHODS: MarketScan was queried from 2014 to 2017 for episodes of mastectomy, breast reconstruction (immediate and delayed), breast revision, and reduction. Only patients continuously enrolled for the full calendar year after the index operation were included. HDHPs and low-deductible health plans (LDHPs) were compared based on OOP cost sharing. Outcomes included surgery use rates, seasonality of operations, and median/mean OOP costs. RESULTS: Annual mastectomy and breast reconstruction use rates varied little between LDHPs and HDHPs. Mastectomies, delayed breast reconstruction, and elective breast procedures (P < 0.001) all showed significant increases in fourth-quarter use, whereas immediate breast reconstruction did not. Regardless of timing and reconstruction method, HDHPs had significantly greater median OOP costs compared to LDHPs (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mastectomy and breast reconstruction rates did not differ between LDHPs and HDHPs, but seasonality for all breast procedures was measured with the exception of immediate breast reconstruction, suggesting that women are rational economic actors. Regardless of service timing and reconstruction modality, HDHP patients had greater OOP costs compared to LDHP patients, which serves as a good starting point for provider engagement in financial toxicity.

Variation in Payment per Work Relative Value Unit for Breast Reconstruction and Nonbreast Microsurgical Reconstruction: An All-Payer Claims Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Commercial payments for implant-based breast reconstruction have increased within the past decade, whereas reimbursements have stagnated for microsurgical techniques. The physician payment-to-work relative value unit ratio allows for standardization when comparing procedures of differing complexity. This study aimed to characterize payment per work relative value unit for common breast and nonbreast microsurgical procedures. METHODS: The Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database was queried from 2010 to 2014 for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes related to microsurgical and breast reconstruction. International Classification of Diseases codes were further used to categorize procedures by anatomical region, including head and neck, breast, trunk, and extremities. Physician payments, both commercial and governmental, were aggregated by anatomical region and CPT code. Payment distributions were described with means and medians and compared using statistical tests. RESULTS: Among 3435 commercial claims, distributions of physician payments per work relative value unit for microsurgical and common breast procedures differed only for breast free flaps billed through S codes (p < 0.001). Microsurgical breast procedures (CPT code 19364) had significantly greater median payments per work relative value unit compared to microsurgery of the head and neck, trunk, and upper extremities (p = 0.004). Payment per work relative value unit for common breast and nonbreast microsurgical procedures did not differ significantly among governmental claims (p = 0.103). CONCLUSIONS: Adjustment of physician payments by work relative value units did not show significant variability across common breast procedures, except for S codes, suggesting that payments are mostly driven by differences in work relative value units and individual contractual negotiations. Lower payments per work relative value unit for other regions compared to breast suggests an opportunity for negotiation with commercial payers.

Impact of Physician Payments on Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: An All-Payer Claim Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rates of autologous breast reconstruction are stagnant compared with prosthetic techniques. Insufficient physician payment for microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction is one possible explanation. The payment difference between governmental and commercial payers creates a natural experiment to evaluate its impact on method of reconstruction. This study assessed the influence of physician payment differences for microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction and implants by insurance type on the likelihood of undergoing microsurgical reconstruction. METHODS: The Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database was queried for women undergoing immediate autologous or implant breast reconstruction from 2010 to 2014. Univariate analyses compared demographic and clinical characteristics between different reconstructive approaches. Logistic regression explored the relative impact of insurance type and physician payments on breast reconstruction modality. RESULTS: Of the women in this study, 82.7 percent had commercial and 17.3 percent had governmental insurance. Implants were performed in 80 percent of women, whereas 20 percent underwent microsurgical autologous reconstruction. Women with Medicaid versus commercial insurance were less likely to undergo microsurgical reconstruction (16.4 percent versus 20.3 percent; p = 0.063). Commercial insurance, older age, and obesity independently increased the odds of microsurgical reconstruction (p < 0.01). When comparing median physician payments, governmental payers reimbursed 78 percent and 63 percent less than commercial payers for microsurgical reconstruction ($1831 versus $8435) and implants ($1249 versus $3359, respectively). Stratified analysis demonstrated that as physician payment increased, the likelihood of undergoing microsurgical reconstruction increased, independent of insurance type (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Women with governmental insurance had lower odds of undergoing microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction compared with commercial payers. Regardless of payer, greater reimbursement for microsurgical reconstruction increased the likelihood of microsurgical reconstruction. Current microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction reimbursements may not be commensurate with physician effort when compared to prosthetic techniques. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.