National fluid shifts: fifteen-year trends in paracentesis and thoracentesis procedures.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate national trends in paracentesis and thoracentesis procedures and the relative roles of specialty groups providing these services. METHODS: Medicare Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files from 1993 to 2008 were analyzed for paracentesis and thoracentesis procedure codes. Using physician specialty identifier codes, procedure volumes were extracted for radiologists, primary care physicians, and surgeons for both procedures. Volume data were extracted for gastroenterologists and pulmonary and critical care medicine physicians, respectively, for paracentesis and thoracentesis. Frequency by site of service was similarly evaluated. Relative changes were calculated. RESULTS: Between 1993 and 2008, paracentesis procedures on Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries increased by 133% (from 64,371 to 149,699), and thoracentesis procedures decreased by 14% (from 147,363 to 127,444). Services by radiologists increased by 964% (from 10,456 to 111,275) and 358% (from 14,531 to 66,602), respectively, while all other targeted groups experienced declines. For paracentesis, radiologist and gastroenterologist procedure shares changed from 16% and 32%, respectively, in 1993 to 74% and 6% in 2008. For thoracentesis, radiologist and pulmonary and critical care medicine physician shares changed from 10% and 49% to 52% and 27%. Relative shifts in site of service to the hospital outpatient setting occurred for both procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Since 1993, paracentesis procedures on Medicare beneficiaries have more than doubled, while thoracentesis volumes have declined slightly. Radiologists now far exceed gastroenterologists and pulmonary and critical care medicine physicians, respectively, as the predominant providers of these services. Those shifts are likely attributable to both the incremental safety of imaging guidance and also the unfavorable economics of these procedures.

Medicare physician payments: impacts of changes on rural physicians.

Medicare payment disproportionately impacts rural physicians compared to urban. For example, 51% of rural physicians, compared to 44% of urban physicians, receive at least 38% of their payments from Medicare.1 Thus, the Medicare physician payment system is of significant rural interest. In this policy brief, we present the effects of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) of 2003 on physician payment rates in rural areas. Specifically, we examine the impact of creating a floor of 1.00 in the geographic practice cost index (GPCI) for work expense. We also show the effects of the Medicare incentive payment (MIP) for providing services in shortage areas and of the bonus for practicing in a physician scarcity area. Our principal findings are the following: (1) Increases to the GPCI for work expense accounted for a substantial percentage of the two-year increases in total payment to physicians in rural payment areas. (2) Increases in the conversion factor (CF) (base payment) accounted for most of the increases in total payment in all but 6 of the 89 Medicare payment localities; in those 6 areas, the dominant factor was GPCI adjustment. (3) Bonus payments are a more direct means of targeting increased payments to physicians in specific areas than is a general increase in one part of the payment formula.

An analysis of Medicare's Incentive Payment program for physicians in health professional shortage areas.

CONTEXT: Medicare's Incentive Payment (MIP) program provides a 10% bonus payment to providers who treat Medicare patients in rural and urban areas where there is a shortage of generalist physicians. PURPOSE: To examine the experience of Alaska, Idaho, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Washington with the MIP program. We determined the program's utilization and which types of physicians received payments. METHODS: Retrospective cohort design, utilizing complete 1998 Medicare Part B data. Physician specialty was determined through American Medical Association data. Rural status was determined by linking the physician business ZIP code to its Rural-Urban Commuting Area code (RUCA). FINDINGS: There were 2,220,275 patients and 39,749 providers in the cohort, including 9,769 (24.6%) generalists, 21,331 (53.7%) specialists, and 8,649 (21.8%) nonphysician providers. Over $4 million in bonus payments (median payment = $173) were made to providers in HPSAs. Specialists and urban providers received 58% and 14% of the bonus reimbursements, respectively. Two million dollars in payments were not distributed because the providers did not claim them. Over $2.8 million in bonus claims were distributed to providers who likely did not work in approved HPSA sites. CONCLUSIONS: The MIP bonus payments given to providers are small. Many providers who should have claimed the bonus did not, and many providers who likely did not qualify for the bonus claimed and received it. Consideration should be given to focusing and enlarging the bonus payments to specific providers, rather than rewarding all providers equally. Policy makers should also consider a system that prospectively determines provider eligibility.

Shortcomings in Medicare bonus payments for physicians in underserved areas.

This study examines trends in Medicare spending for basic payments and bonus payments for physician services provided to beneficiaries residing in nonmetropolitan counties. For our analysis, we used Medicare Part B physician/supplier claims data for 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998. Payments under the congressionally mandated bonus payment program acccounted for less than 1 percent of expenditures for physician services in nonmetropolitan, underserved counties. Physician payments increased from 1992 to 1998, while bonus payments increased through 1996 but then declined by 13 percent by 1998. The share of bonus payments to primary care physicians declined throughout the decade, but the share for primary care services increased.

Exclusion of international medical graduates from federal health-care programs.

BACKGROUND: The professional standards of international medical graduates have been the subject of controversy, but empirical research on this topic has been limited. OBJECTIVES: This report considers whether international medical graduates are at greater risk than US medical graduates for exclusion by the federal government from federally funded programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. RESEARCH DESIGN: The list of excluded physicians was merged with data regarding 87,729 family and general practice physicians from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, 555 of whom were currently excluded. Logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of international medical graduate status on the probability of exclusion, controlling for board-certification status and other physician characteristics. International medical graduates from high-income Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries are distinguished from other international medical graduates. RESULTS: The adjusted exclusion rates of international medical graduates from OECD countries were similar to that of US medical graduates. Among board-certified physicians, the relative risk of exclusion of non-OECD international medical graduates was 2.19 (P <0.001) compared with US medical graduates. Board certification had an even stronger association: US medical graduates who had never been board certified had a relative risk of 4.12 (P <0.001) compared with board-certified US medical graduates. The never board-certified relative risk was 1.72 (P <0.001) among non-OECD international medical graduates compared with board-certified graduates. Among physicians who had never been board certified, rates of US and international medical graduates did not differ substantially. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is needed regarding the causal determinants of exclusion disparities. It is unclear to what extent these disparities may reflect differences in ethical conduct, quality of care, or prejudicial enforcement practices, and the extent to which board certification can causally reduce actions leading to exclusion.

Rural and urban physicians: does the content of their Medicare practices differ?

Rural and urban areas have significant differences in the availability of medical technology, medical practice structures and patient populations. This study uses 1994 Medicare claims data to examine whether these differences are associated with variation in the content of practice between physicians practicing in rural and urban areas. This study compared the number of patients, outpatient visits, and inpatient visits per physician in the different specialties, diagnosis clusters, patient age and sex, and procedure frequency and type for board-certified rural and urban physicians in 12 ambulatory medical specialties. Overall, 14.4 percent of physicians in the 12 specialties practiced exclusively in rural Washington, with great variation by specialty. Rural physicians were older and less likely to be female than urban physicians. Rural physicians saw larger numbers of elderly patients and had higher volumes of outpatient visits than their urban counterparts. For all specialty groups except general surgeons and obstetrician-gynecologists, the diagnostic scope of practice was specialty-specific and similar for rural and urban physicians. Rural general surgeons had more visits for gastrointestinal disorders, while rural obstetrician-gynecologists had more visits out of their specialty domain (e.g., hypertension, diabetes) than their urban counterparts. The scope of procedures for rural and urban physicians in most specialties showed more similarities than differences. While the fund of knowledge and outpatient procedural training needed by most rural and urban practitioners to care for the elderly is similar, rural general surgeons and obstetrician-gynecologists need training outside their traditional specialty areas to optimally care for their patients.

Factors affecting primary care physician participation in Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the levels of participation and the relative association of economic and noneconomic factors on primary care physician participation in the Medicare program. METHODS: Demographic information, participation in Medicare, and attitudes toward both the Medicare program and Medicare patients were collected in a written survey mailed to half the primary care physicians in Iowa. Ordinary least squares and logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors associated with the percentage of Medicare patients in a practice and the acceptance of all new Medicare patients, respectively. RESULTS: Two thirds of physicians were accepting all new Medicare patients, whereas 16% were accepting no new Medicare patients. Factors associated with having a higher percentage of Medicare patients in a practice were as follows: (1) a larger proportion of Medicare recipients in the county, (2) practice as a general internal medicine physician, (3) more years in practice at the current location, (4) greater enjoyment treating elderly patients, (5) less concern about having too many Medicare patients, and (6) a stronger belief that the Medicare program respects their professional judgment. Physicians less concerned about having too many Medicare patients in their practice and physicians in counties with a higher percentage of Medicare patients were significantly more likely to accept all new Medicare patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that as Medicare reforms are discussed, careful consideration of the impact of these reforms on noneconomic issues is important to ensure adequate physician participation and access for elderly patients through the Medicare program.

Physician case-by-case assignment and participation in Medicare.

The prospect of budget cuts in Medicare is likely to result in less generous reimbursements from Medicare and thus affects physicians' willingness to accept Medicare patients with the reduced payments. This study examines physicians' decisions about case-by-case assignment and participation in Medicare in relation to Medicare reimbursement generosity. A two-part model is applied to a database from a national survey of physicians. The results indicate that reimbursement generosity from private insurance relative to that from Medicare negatively affects physicians' assignment rates, implying that the elderly's access to health care and/or the financial burden is likely to be jeopardized by further reductions in Medicare reimbursements.

Access to care under physician payment reform: a physician-based analysis.

This article reports physician-based measures of access to care during the 3 years surrounding the 1989 physician payment reforms. Analysis was facilitated by a new system of physician identifiers in Medicare claims. Access measures include caseload per physician and related measures of the demographic composition of physicians' clientele, the proportion of physicians performing surgical and other procedures, and the assignment rate. The caseload and assignment measures were stable or improving over time, suggesting that reforms did not harm access. Procedure performance rates tended to decline between 1992 and 1993, but reductions were inversely related to the estimated fee changes, and several may be explainable by other factors.

Balance billing under Medicare: protecting beneficiaries and preserving physician participation.

Medicare's experience with balance billing provides valuable lessons for policy making for national or state health care reform. Medicare developed several policies to encourage physicians to become participating providers who accept Medicare-allowed charges as payment in full. Only nonparticipating physicians are permitted to bill for additional amounts beyond that paid by Medicare, and there are limits on the amount of balance billing per claim. As shown by the analysis of claims presented in this article, Medicare has successfully provided financial protection to beneficiaries. In 1986, more than 60 percent of expenditures for physician services were on assigned claims for which there could be no balance billing; by 1990, 80 percent of expenditures were on assigned claims. Balance billing decreased by about 30 percent during the same period. Although these policies have been successful in reducing total expenditures for balance billing, they may not provide financial protection to the most economically vulnerable beneficiaries. Using survey and claims data, we found that the poor have lower balance billing expenditures for services provided by primary care physicians, but that there is no relationship between poverty status and balance billing expenditures for services of nonprimary care physicians. In addition, most low-income beneficiaries are liable for balance bills. Under health care reform, adoption of Medicare's incentive-based approach with mandatory assignment for the poor would allow for some choice based on price and would provide financial protection for all consumers.

Physician responses to Medicare physician payment reform: preliminary results on access to care.

This paper examines the impact of Medicare physician payment reform on access to care by comparing several physician-based access measures in the pre- and post-reform periods. The results suggest that the broad goals of payment reform may have been at least partially achieved: the proportion of physician revenues derived from Medicare increased for primary care physicians and decreased for nonprimary care MDs; there was little change in the absolute or relative number of visits provided to Medicare patients; and an increasing number of physicians charged no more than the Medicare payment amount. Some signs of deteriorating access were found, however. Fewer physicians were willing to treat all new Medicare patients and more physicians accepted no new Medicare patients. Furthermore, there was an increase in the proportion of physicians who reduced or stopped providing to Medicare patients certain types of services that they continued to provide to other patients.

Border crossing for physician services: implications for controlling expenditures.

In this article, the authors explore geographic border crossing for the use of Medicare physician services. Using data from the 1988 Part B Medicare Annual Data (BMAD) file, they find that there is substantial geographic variation across both States and urban and rural areas in border crossing to seek services. As might be expected, there is more border crossing among smaller geographic areas than among States. Predominantly rural areas tend to be major importers of services, but urban areas, on average, export services. Border crossing tends to be greater for high-technology services such as advanced imaging, cardiovascular surgery, and oncology procedures. These results suggest that expenditure-control policies applying to States or metropolitan areas should incorporate adjusters for patients' current geographic patterns of care.