Correlation between Relative Value Units and Operative Time for Flap-Based Reconstruction Procedures.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 02 2023
01 02 2023
Historique:
entrez:
25
1
2023
pubmed:
26
1
2023
medline:
28
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Procedures performed by plastic surgeons tend to generate lower work relative value units (RVUs) compared to other surgical specialties despite their major contributions to hospital revenue. The authors aimed to compare work RVUs allocated to all free flap and pedicled flap reconstruction procedures based on their associated median operative times and discuss implications of these compensation disparities. A retrospective analysis of deidentified patient data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was performed, and relevant CPT codes for flap-based reconstruction were identified from 2011 to 2018. RVU data were assessed using the 2020 National Physician Fee Schedule Relative Value File. The work RVU per unit time was calculated using the median operative time for each procedure. A total of 3991 procedures were included in analysis. With increased operative time and surgical complexity, work RVU per minute trended downward. Free-fascial flaps with microvascular anastomosis generated the highest work RVUs per minute among all free flaps (0.114 work RVU/minute). Free-muscle/myocutaneous flap reconstruction generated the least work RVUs per minute (0.0877 work RVU/minute) among all flap reconstruction procedures. Longer operative procedures for flap-based reconstruction were designated with higher work RVU. Surgeons were reimbursed less per operative unit time for these surgical procedures, however. Specifically, free flaps resulted in reduced compensation in work RVUs per minute compared to pedicled flaps, except in breast reconstruction. More challenging operations have surprisingly resulted in lower compensation, demonstrating the inequalities in reimbursement within and between surgical specialties. Plastic surgeons should be aware of these discrepancies to appropriately advocate for themselves.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Procedures performed by plastic surgeons tend to generate lower work relative value units (RVUs) compared to other surgical specialties despite their major contributions to hospital revenue. The authors aimed to compare work RVUs allocated to all free flap and pedicled flap reconstruction procedures based on their associated median operative times and discuss implications of these compensation disparities.
METHODS
A retrospective analysis of deidentified patient data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was performed, and relevant CPT codes for flap-based reconstruction were identified from 2011 to 2018. RVU data were assessed using the 2020 National Physician Fee Schedule Relative Value File. The work RVU per unit time was calculated using the median operative time for each procedure.
RESULTS
A total of 3991 procedures were included in analysis. With increased operative time and surgical complexity, work RVU per minute trended downward. Free-fascial flaps with microvascular anastomosis generated the highest work RVUs per minute among all free flaps (0.114 work RVU/minute). Free-muscle/myocutaneous flap reconstruction generated the least work RVUs per minute (0.0877 work RVU/minute) among all flap reconstruction procedures.
CONCLUSIONS
Longer operative procedures for flap-based reconstruction were designated with higher work RVU. Surgeons were reimbursed less per operative unit time for these surgical procedures, however. Specifically, free flaps resulted in reduced compensation in work RVUs per minute compared to pedicled flaps, except in breast reconstruction. More challenging operations have surprisingly resulted in lower compensation, demonstrating the inequalities in reimbursement within and between surgical specialties. Plastic surgeons should be aware of these discrepancies to appropriately advocate for themselves.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36696331
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009859
pii: 00006534-202302000-00038
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
299e-307eInformations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Références
Bergman MJ. Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS): a useful tool for practice analysis. J Clin Rheumatol. 2003;9:325–327.
Hsiao WC, Braun P, Dunn DL, et al. An overview of the development and refinement of the resource-based relative value scale: the foundation for reform of U.S. physician payment. Med Care. 1992;30:NS1–NS12.
Maloney JV Jr. A critical analysis of the resource-based relative value scale. JAMA. 1991;266:3453–3458.
Laugesen MJ. The resource-based relative value scale and physician reimbursement policy. Chest. 2014;146:1413–1419.
Childers CP, Dworsky JQ, Russell MM, Maggard-Gibbons M. Association of work measures and specialty with assigned work relative value units among surgeons. JAMA Surg. 2019;154:915–921.
Medical Association A. RVS update process 2021. Available at: www.ama-assn.org/cpt-office-visits . Accessed February 6, 2021.
Doval AF, Gratzon AC, Neese V, Shuck JW, Friedman J, Echo A. Is our effort appropriately valued? An analysis of work relative value units in immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;146:502–508.
Gao YN. Committee representation and Medicare reimbursements-An examination of the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale. Health Serv Res. 2018;53:4353–4370.
American Medical Association. Composition of the RVS Update Committee (RUC). Available at: https://www.ama-assn.org/about/rvs-update-committee-ruc/composition-rvs-update-committee-ruc . Accessed May 16, 2021.
Shah DR, Bold RJ, Yang AD, Khatri VP, Martinez SR, Canter RJ. Relative value units poorly correlate with measures of surgical effort and complexity. J Surg Res. 2014;190:465–470.
Resnick AS, Corrigan D, Mullen JL, Kaiser LR. Surgeon contribution to hospital bottom line: not all are created equal. Ann Surg. 2005;242:530–537; discussion 537.
Wang TY, Nelson JA, Corrigan D, Commack T, Serletti JM. Contribution of plastic surgery to a health care system: our economic value to hospital profitability. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129;154e–160e.
American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic surgery statistics report 2019. Available at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2019/plastic-surgery-statistics-full-report-2019.pdf . Accessed February 6, 2021.
Sheckter CC, Panchal HJ, Razdan SN, et al. The influence of physician payments on the method of breast reconstruction: a national claims analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142:434E–442E.
Sando IC, Chung KC, Kidwell KM, Kozlow JH, Malay S, Momoh AO. Comprehensive breast reconstruction in an academic surgical practice: an evaluation of the financial impact. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134:1131–1139.
Shamsunder MG, Sheckter CC, Sheinin A, et al. Variation in payment per work relative value unit for breast reconstruction and nonbreast microsurgical reconstruction: an all-payer claims database analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;147:505–513.
McCall N, Cromwell J, Braun P. Validation of physician survey estimates of surgical time using operating room logs. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:764–777.
Little DC, St Peter SD, Calkins CM, et al. Relative value units correlate with pediatric surgeons’ operating time: when perceived myth becomes reality. J Pediatr Surg. 2006;41:234–238; discussion 234.
Gan ZS, Wood CM, Hayon S, et al. Correlation of relative value units with surgical complexity and physician workload in urology. Urology. 2020;139:71–77.
Sodhi N, Dalton SE, Garbarino LJ, et al. Not all primary total hip arthroplasties are equal-so is there a difference in reimbursement? Ann Transl Med. 2019;7:74.
Sodhi N, Dalton SE, Gold PA, et al. A comparison of relative value units in revision hip versus revision knee arthroplasty. J Orthop. 2019;16:45–48.
Jenkins KJ, Gauvreau K, Newburger JW, Kyn LB, Iezzoni LI, Mayer JE. Validation of relative value scale for congenital heart operations. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;66:860–869.
Chiu RG, Siddiqui N, Nunna RS, et al. Association of neurosurgical work relative value units with objective markers of operative complexity. World Neurosurg. 2021;146:e194–e204.
Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M. Assessment of the contribution of the work relative value unit scale to differences in physician compensation across medical and surgical specialties. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:493–501.
Laugesen MJ, Wada R, Chen EM. In setting doctors’ Medicare fees, CMS almost always accepts the relative value update panel’s advice on work values. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:965–972.