A Cross-Sectional Analysis of American Insurance Coverage of Prominauris Otoplasty.
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
ISSN: 1536-3732
Titre abrégé: J Craniofac Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010410
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
10
7
2021
medline:
5
11
2021
entrez:
9
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Prominent ears affect up to 5% of the population and can lead to social and psychological concerns at a critical time of social development. It can be addressed with an otoplasty, which is often considered a cosmetic procedure. The authors assessed insurance coverage of all indications of otoplasty and their medical necessity criteria. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 58 insurance policies for otoplasty. The insurance companies were selected based on their state enrolment and market share. A web-based search and telephone interviews were utilized to identify the policies. Medically necessary criteria were then abstracted from the publicly available policies. Of the 58 insurance policies assessed, 25 (43%) provide coverage of otoplasty. There were 2 indications for coverage: hearing loss (n = 20, 80%) and normal approximation (n = 14, 56%), which would encompass prominent ears. Normal approximation was a covered indication for significantly fewer insurers than hearing loss (56% versus 80%, P = 0.0013). Of all the otoplasty policies which covered normal approximation, 21% (n = 3) addressed protruding ears as an etiology. Prominent ears were not included in any policies which covered hearing loss. All policies inclusive of prominent ears required a protrusion of >20 mm from the temporal surface of the head (n = 3, 100%). There is a great discrepancy in insurance coverage of otoplasty. A greater proportion of policies cover hearing loss compared to normal approximation. The authors encourage plastic surgeons to advocate for the necessity and coverage of normal approximation by insurers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Prominent ears affect up to 5% of the population and can lead to social and psychological concerns at a critical time of social development. It can be addressed with an otoplasty, which is often considered a cosmetic procedure. The authors assessed insurance coverage of all indications of otoplasty and their medical necessity criteria.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 58 insurance policies for otoplasty. The insurance companies were selected based on their state enrolment and market share. A web-based search and telephone interviews were utilized to identify the policies. Medically necessary criteria were then abstracted from the publicly available policies.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of the 58 insurance policies assessed, 25 (43%) provide coverage of otoplasty. There were 2 indications for coverage: hearing loss (n = 20, 80%) and normal approximation (n = 14, 56%), which would encompass prominent ears. Normal approximation was a covered indication for significantly fewer insurers than hearing loss (56% versus 80%, P = 0.0013). Of all the otoplasty policies which covered normal approximation, 21% (n = 3) addressed protruding ears as an etiology. Prominent ears were not included in any policies which covered hearing loss. All policies inclusive of prominent ears required a protrusion of >20 mm from the temporal surface of the head (n = 3, 100%).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There is a great discrepancy in insurance coverage of otoplasty. A greater proportion of policies cover hearing loss compared to normal approximation. The authors encourage plastic surgeons to advocate for the necessity and coverage of normal approximation by insurers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34238878
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007822
pii: 00001665-202112000-00043
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2741-2743Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Weerda H. Classification of congenital deformities of the auricle. Facial Plast Surg 1988; 5:385–388.
Kennedy KL, Katrib Z. Otoplasty. StatPearls Publishing. 2020; Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538320/. Accessed December 16, 2020
Schneider AL, Sidle DM. Cosmetic otoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2018; 26:19–29.
Engelhardt T, Crawford MW, Lerman J. Cote C, Lerman J, Anderson B. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. A Practice of Anesthesia for Infants and Children. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Inc; 2009. 70–713.
Madzharov MM. A new method of auriculoplasty for protruding ears. Br J Plast Surg 1989; 42:285–290.
Sheerin D, Macleod M, Kusumakar V. Psychosocial adjustment in children with port-wine stains and prominent ears. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1995; 34:1637–1647.
Naumann A. Otoplasty - techniques, characteristics and risks. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020; 6:Doc04.
Papadopulos NA, Niehaus R, Keller E, et al. The psychologic and psychosocial impact of otoplasty on children and adults. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26:2309–2314.
Cooper-Hobson G, Jaffe W. The benefits of otoplasty for children: further evidence to satisfy the modern NHS. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg 2009; 62:190–194.
Songu M, Kutlu A. Long-term psychosocial impact of otoplasty performed on children with prominent ears. J Laryngol Otol 2014; 128:768–771.
Sirin S, Abaci F, Selcuk A, et al. Psychosocial effects of otoplasty in adult patients: a prospective cohort study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019; 276:1533–1539.
Janis JE, Rohrich RJ, Gutowski KA. Otoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 115:60e–72e.
Ear Surgery Cost | American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Available at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/cosmetic-procedures/ear-surgery/cost. Accessed December 16, 2020
American Society of Plastic Surgeons. ASPS Recommended Insurance Coverage Criteria for Third-Party Payers: Ear Deformity: Prominent Ears. 2015; Available at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/Health-Policy/Positions/Ear_Deformity_Prominent_Ears_ICC.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2020
Kaiser Family Foundation. Market Share and Enrollment of Largest Three Insurers – Individual Market | KFF. Available at: https://www.kff.org/private-insurance/state-indicator/market-share-and-enrollment-of-largest-three-insurers-individual-market/?currentTimeframe=0&selectedRows=%7B%22wrapups%22:%7B%22united-states%22:%7B%7D%7D,%22states%22:%7B%22all%22:%7B%7D%7D%7D&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D. Accessed December 16, 2020
2018 Market Share Reports for the Top 125 Life and Fraternal Insurance Groups and Companies by State and Countrywide. 2019; Available at: http://www.naic.org//prod_serv_home.htm. Accessed December 16, 2020
Horlock N, Vögelin E, Bradbury ET, et al. Psychosocial outcome of patients after ear reconstruction: a retrospective study of 62 patients. Ann Plast Surg 2005; 54:517–524.
American Medical Association. H-475.992 Definitions of “Cosmetic” and “Reconstructive” Surgery | AMA. Available at: https://policysearch.ama-assn.org/policyfinder/detail/cosmetic?uri=%2FAMADoc%2FHOD.xml-0-4326.xml. Accessed December 16, 2020
Ngaage LM, Rose J, Pace L, et al. A review of national insurance coverage of post-bariatric upper body lift. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2019; 43:1250–1256.
Sandman L, Hansson E. An ethics analysis of the rationale for publicly funded plastic surgery. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:94.
Dazert S, Thomas JP, Volkenstein S. Surgical and technical modalities for hearing restoration in ear malformations. Facial Plast Surg 2015; 31:581–586.
Rinaldi V, Portmann D. Otoplasty: special attention in patients wearing hearing aids. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol 2011; 132:223–226.
Eng H, Chiu RS. Spectacle fitting with ear, nose and face deformities or abnormalities. Clin Exp Optom 2002; 85:389–391.
Salgado CJ, Mardini S. Corrective otoplasty for symptomatic prominent ears in U.S. soldiers. Mil Med 2006; 171:128–130.