Dataset Information

Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Women comprise an increasing proportion of the otolaryngology workforce. Prior studies have demonstrated gender-based disparity in physician practice and income in other clinical specialties; however, research has not comprehensively examined whether gender-based income disparities exist within the field of otolaryngology.

Objective

To determine whether diversity of practice, clinical productivity, and Medicare payment differ between male and female otolaryngologists and whether any identified variation is associated with practice setting.

Design, setting, and participants

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of publicly available Medicare data summarizing payments to otolaryngologists from January 1 through December 31, 2017. Male and female otolaryngologists participating in Medicare in facility-based (FB; hospital-based) and non-facility-based settings (NFB; eg, physician office) for outpatient otolaryngologic care were included.

Main outcomes and measures

Number of unique billing codes (diversity of practice) per physician, number of services provided per physician (physician productivity), and Medicare payment per physician. Outcomes were stratified by practice setting (FB vs NFB).

Results

A total of 8456 otolaryngologists (1289 [15.2%] women; 7167 [84.8%] men) received Medicare payments in 2017. Per physician, women billed fewer unique codes (mean difference, -2.10; 95% CI, -2.46 to -1.75; P < .001), provided fewer services (mean difference, -640; 95% CI, -784 to -496; P < .001), and received less Medicare payment than men (mean difference, -$30 246 (95% CI, -$35 738 to -$24 756; P < .001). When stratified by practice setting, women in NFB settings billed 1.65 fewer unique codes (95% CI, -2.01 to -1.29; P < .001) and provided 633 fewer services (95% CI, -791 to -475; P < .001). In contrast, there was no significant gender-based difference in number of unique codes billed (mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.217 to 0.347; P = .81) or number of services provided (mean difference, 5.1; 95% CI, -55.8 to 45.6; P = .85) in the FB setting. Women received less Medicare payment in both settings compared with men (NFB: mean difference, -$27 746; 95% CI, -$33 502 to -$21 989; P < .001; vs FB: mean difference, -$4002; 95% CI, -$7393 to -$612; P = .02), although the absolute difference was lower in the FB setting.

Conclusions and relevance

Female sex is associated with decreased diversity of practice, lower clinical productivity, and decreased Medicare payment among otolaryngologists. Gender-based inequity is more pronounced in NFB settings compared with FB settings. Further efforts are necessary to better evaluate and address gender disparities within otolaryngology.

SUBMITTER: Miller AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7393586 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.

Miller Ashley L AL Rathi Vinay K VK Burks Ciersten A CA DeVore Elliana Kirsh EK Bergmark Regan W RW Gray Stacey T ST

JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery 20200901 9

<h4>Importance</h4>Women comprise an increasing proportion of the otolaryngology workforce. Prior studies have demonstrated gender-based disparity in physician practice and income in other clinical specialties; however, research has not comprehensively examined whether gender-based income disparities exist within the field of otolaryngology.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether diversity of practice, clinical productivity, and Medicare payment differ between male and female otolaryngologists an ...[more]

PMID: 32745204

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWomen cardiologists receive lower salaries than men; however, it is unknown whether US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement also differs by gender and contributes to the lower salaries.ObjectiveTo determine whether gender differences exist in the reimbursements, charges, and reimbursement per charge from CMS.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional analysis used the CMS database to obtain 2016 reimbursement data for US cardiologists. These included reimbursements to cardiologists, charges submitted, and unique billing codes. Gender differences in reimbursement for evaluation and management and procedural charges from both inpatient and outpatient settings were also assessed. Analysis took place between April 2019 and December 2020.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included median CMS payments received and median charges submitted in the inpatient and outpatient settings in 2016.ResultsIn 2016, 17 524 cardiologists (2312 women [13%] and 15 212 men [87%]) received CMS payments in the inpatient setting, and 16 929 cardiologists (2151 women [13%] and 14 778 men [87%]) received CMS payments in the outpatient setting. Men received higher median payments in the inpatient (median [interquartile range], $62 897 [$30 904-$104 267] vs $45 288 [$21 371-$73 191]; P < .001) and outpatient (median [interquartile range], $91 053 [$34 820-$196 165] vs $51 975 [$15 622-$120 175]; P < .001) practice settings. Men submitted more median charges in the inpatient (median [interquartile range], 1190 [569-2093] charges vs 959 [569-2093] charges; P < .001) and outpatient settings (median [interquartile range], 1685 [644-3328] charges vs 870 [273-1988] charges; P < .001). In a multivariable-adjusted linear regression analysis, women received less CMS payments compared with men (log-scale β = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.02) after adjustment for number of charges, number of unique billing codes, complexity of patient panel, years since graduation of physicians, and physician subspecialty. Payment by billing codes, both inpatient and outpatient, did not differ by gender.Conclusions and relevanceThere may be potential differences in CMS payments between men and women cardiologists, which appear to stem from gender differences in the number and types of charges submitted. The mechanisms behind these differences merit further research, both to understand why such gender differences exist and also to facilitate reductions in pay disparities.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough physician sex is known to influence salary even after controlling for productivity, sex-based differences in clinical activity and reimbursement among radiation oncologists are poorly understood.ObjectivesTo evaluate differences by sex in productivity, breadth of practice, and payments and to characterize Medicare reimbursement by sex among similarly productive groups of radiation oncologists.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using the January 1 to December 31, 2016, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (POSPUF) to identify charge and payment information for individual radiation oncologists. Clinicians were part of a population-based sample of US radiation oncologists who bill Medicare in both non-facility-based (NFB) and facility-based (FB) practice settings. Analysis was conducted from June 5 to 25, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresOutcome measurements included physician productivity (measured by number of Medicare charges), physician payments (reported as total Medicare payments as well as mean payments per charge submitted and per beneficiary treated), and physician breadth of practice (measured by number of unique Medicare billing codes) in NFB and FB settings.ResultsA total of 4393 radiation oncologists (1133 women and 3260 men) were included in the POSPUF in 2016. Compared with their male counterparts, female physicians in the NFB setting submitted a mean of 1051 fewer charges (95% CI, -1458 to -644; P < .001), collected a mean of $143 610 less in revenue (95% CI, -$185 528 to -$101 692; P < .001), and used a mean of 1.32 fewer unique billing codes (95% CI, -2.23 to -0.41; P = .004). Compared with their male counterparts, female radiation oncologists in the FB setting submitted a mean of 423 fewer charges (95% CI, -506 to -341; P < .001), collected a mean of $26 735 less in revenue (95% CI, -$31 910 to -$21 560; P < .001), and submitted a mean of 1.28 fewer unique billing codes (95% CI, -1.77 to -0.78; P < .001). Women represented 46 of the 397 most highly productive radiation oncologists in the FB setting (11.6%) and collected a mean of $33 026 less (95% CI, -$52 379 to -$13 673; P = .001) than men who were similarly productive. In the NFB setting, women represented 54 of the 326 most highly productive radiation oncologists (16.6%) and collected $345 944 (95% CI, -$522 663 to -$169 225; P < .001) less than similarly highly productive men. Women collected a mean of $8.49 less per charge (95% CI, -$14.13 to -$2.86; P = .003) than men in the NFB setting.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that female radiation oncologists submit fewer Medicare charges, are reimbursed less per charge they submit, and receive lower Medicare payments overall compared with male radiation oncologists. Even among similarly productive radiation oncologists, women in this study still collected less revenue than men. Further research is required to understand the sex-based barriers to economic advancement within radiation oncology.

Project description:ImportanceClinicians are increasingly adopting telemedicine in an effort to expand patient access and efficiently deliver care. However, the extent to which otolaryngologists provide telemedicine services is unclear.ObjectiveTo characterize recent trends in the use of telemedicine by otolaryngologists to deliver care to Medicare beneficiaries.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018, using publicly available Medicare Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary data on physicians practicing in the field of otolaryngology and benchmark specialties (dermatology and psychiatry) that provided telemedicine services to Medicare beneficiaries.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were the mean annual number of telemedicine services delivered per active physician and mean annual payment per active physician for these services. Secondary outcomes included the number, setting, and complexity of telemedicine services.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2018, otolaryngologists provided 2127 total telemedicine services (7 unique service types) to Medicare beneficiaries and received $88 574 in total payment for these services. During this period, the mean number of telemedicine services increased at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.0%, and the mean Medicare payment per otolaryngologist increased at a CAGR of 21.8%. In comparison, telemedicine use during this period generally increased at a higher rate in the fields of dermatology (mean number of services per active physician at CAGR of 13.0%; mean Medicare payment per active physician at CAGR of 12.5%) and psychiatry (mean number of services per active physician at CAGR of 25.8%; mean Medicare payment per active physician at CAGR of 26.6%). In 2018, outpatient evaluation and management visits accounted for most telemedicine services provided (337 of 353 [95.5%]) and the payments received ($17 542.13 of $18 470.47 [95.0%]) by otolaryngologists. In contrast, physicians in other specialties also provided substantial portions of telemedicine services in the inpatient (psychiatry, 18 403 of 198 478 [9.3%]; dermatology, 231 of 1034 [22.3%]) and skilled nursing facility settings (psychiatry, 14 690 of 198 478 [7.4%]; dermatology, 46 of 1034 [4.4%]).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that the extent to which otolaryngologists used telemedicine to deliver care to Medicare beneficiaries between 2010 and 2018 was rare. Although there was relative growth in the use of telemedicine by otolaryngologists during this period, absolute growth remained low. Policy makers and provider organizations should support otolaryngologists in the adoption of telemedicine technologies, especially while coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) viral suppression efforts necessitate prolonged restriction of physical clinic throughput.

Project description:ImportanceGender disparities continue to exist in the medical profession, including potential disparities in industry-supported financial contributions. Although there are potential drawbacks to industry relationships, such industry ties have the potential to promote scholarly discourse and increase understanding and accessibility of novel technologies and drugs.ObjectivesTo evaluate whether gender disparities exist in relationships between pharmaceutical and/or medical device industries and academic otolaryngologists.Design, setting, and participantsAn analysis of bibliometric data and industry funding of academic otolaryngologists.Main outcomes and measuresIndustry payments as reported within the CMS Open Payment Database.MethodsOnline faculty listings were used to determine academic rank, fellowship training, and gender of full-time faculty otolaryngologists in the 100 civilian training programs in the United States. Industry contributions to these individuals were evaluated using the CMS Open Payment Database, which was created by the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in response to increasing public and regulatory interest in industry relationships and aimed to increase the transparency of such relationships. The Scopus database was used to determine bibliometric indices and publication experience (in years) for all academic otolaryngologists.ResultsOf 1514 academic otolaryngologists included in this analysis, 1202 (79.4%) were men and 312 (20.6%) were women. In 2014, industry contributed a total of $4.9 million to academic otolaryngologists. $4.3 million (88.5%) of that went to men, in a population in which 79.4% are male. Male otolaryngologists received greater median contributions than did female otolaryngologists (median [interquartile range (IQR)], $211 [$86-$1245] vs $133 [$51-$316]). Median contributions were greater to men than women at assistant and associate professor academic ranks (median [IQR], $168 [$77-$492] vs $114 [$55-$290] and $240 [$87-$1314] vs $166 [$58-$328], respectively). Overall, a greater proportion of men received industry contributions than women (68.0% vs 56.1%,). By subspecialty, men had greater median contribution levels among otologists and rhinologists (median [IQR], $609 [$166-$6015] vs $153 [$56-$336] and $1134 [$286-$5276] vs $425 [$188-$721], respectively).Conclusions and relevanceA greater proportion of male vs female academic otolaryngologists receive contributions from industry. These differences persist after controlling for academic rank and experience. The gender disparities we have identified may be owing to men publishing earlier in their careers, with women often surpassing men later in their academic lives, or as a result of previously described gender disparities in scholarly impact and academic advancement.

Dataset Information

Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Assessment of Gender Differences in Clinical Productivity and Medicare Payments Among Otolaryngologists in 2017.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets